Skip to content

· Private foundation

Hazelbaker Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$102k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$74k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$898kArts & Culture$157kHealth$137kFood & Nutrition$14kHuman Services$1kYouth Development$500Recreation & Sports$500
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $74k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$333k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MADISON-GRANT UNITED SCHOOL CORPORATION$74,427
SALVATION ARMY$10,000
ST JUDE CHILREN'S HOSPITAL$10,000
CHAPARRAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL$8,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–17, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%YOUTH HAVEN: $1k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
IN
OH
CA
CO
VA
AZ
NM
TN
FL
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 13 repeat orgs$63k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
13

Total granted

$1.1M
$53k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%
+60%

Still filing today

38%
54%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureFood & NutritionHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentHealthOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • AF
    Association for Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health
    3× · 2018–2021 · $60k · revenue +30%
  • T
    THEATREZONEINC
    3× · 2018–2020 · $15k · revenue +23%
  • MF
    Mid-Ohio Foodbank
    3× · 2017–2019 · $4k · revenue +37%

Funded once

  • TA
    THE AYNI FUND
    one grant, 2020 · $20k
  • SH
    SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF EAST CENTRAL INDIANA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +60%
  • MI
    Monetary Investment for Lactation Consultant Certificationgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +190% · 28% of their budget
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
2
Colorado Perinatal Care Quality Collaborative

Our mission is to work with colorado healthcare providers, state agencies, insurers, and community groups to improve care for mothers and babies and prevent avoidable deaths and injuries.

Health
3
The Food Bank for Larimer County

To provide food to all in need through community partnerships and hunger relief programs. Our vision is a hunger-free Larimer County.

Food & Nutrition
4
Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.

Food & Nutrition
5
Children's Health Care

We champion the health needs of children and families. we are committed to improving children's health by providing the highest-quality, family centered care, advanced through research and education.

Health
6
Project Milk Mission

Project milk mission is at the forefront of a vital mission - reducing infant mortality rates by championing breastfeeding, with a special focus on supporting low-income african american mothers. through comprehensive services spanning the…

Food & Nutrition
7
The Children's Theatre of Cincinnati

The mission of The Children's Theatre of Cincinnati (TCT) is to educate, entertain and engage audiences of all ages through professional theatrical productions and arts education programming. Our vision is to awaken a lifelong love of…

Arts & Culture
8
Inland Empire Breastfeeding Coalition

Our Inland Empire Breastfeeding Coalition (IEBfC) is a group of dedicated health care professionals and community members who have a desire to raise awareness of the importance of breastfeeding and to create collaborative efforts among…

Health
9
Children's Council of San Francisco

By advocating for quality early care and education, empowering families with information and financial support, and building the capabilities of educators, Children's Council of San Francisco ensures that every child in San Francisco has…

Human Services
10
Edward W Sparrow Hospital

Improving the health of the people in our communities by providing quality, compassionate care to everyone, every time.

Health
11
Variety Children's Hospital

To inspire hope and promote lifelong health by providing the best care to every child.

Health
12
Nuvance Health

Improve the health of every person in our community through the efficient delivery of excellent, innovative and compassionate care.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Invest in Kids; the most unlike its peers is Association for Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

12 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 27 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
10/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MADISON-GRANT UNITED SCHOOL CORP: $751,791 · OtherMADISON-GRANT UNITED SCHOOL CORPORIGINAL PRODUCTIONS THEATRE: $122,500 · OtherORIGINAL PRODUCTIONS THEATRERALPH E HAZELBAKER LIBRARY: $101,960 · OtherRALPH E HAZELBAKER LIBRARYAssociation for Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health: $60,000 · Other+15 more: $133,257 · Other+15 moreTHEATREZONEINC: $15,000 · Arts & CultureCOLUMBUS CHILDREN'S THEATRE: $2,500 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $200 · Arts & CultureSECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF EAST CENTRAL INDIANA INC: $10,000 · Food & NutritionLIFECARE ALLIANCE: $3,500 · Food & NutritionSANA SPACE INC: $5,000 · HealthYOUTH HAVEN INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesINVEST IN KIDS: $500 · Youth Development
Other$1,169,508Arts & Culture$17,700Food & Nutrition$13,500Health$5,000Human Services$1,000Youth Development$500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAssociation for Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health: $60,000 over 3y, 13% of budgetTHEATREZONEINC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetSECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF EAST CENTRAL INDIANA INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMonetary Investment for Lactation Consultant Certification: $5,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetSANA SPACE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetMid-Ohio Foodbank: $3,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetLIFECARE ALLIANCE: $3,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSMILE TRAIN INC: $1,800 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetYOUTH HAVEN INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINVEST IN KIDS: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOLUMBUS ASSOCIATION FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds Association for Prenatal and Perinatal Psychology and Health ↗
  • Who funds THEATREZONEINC ↗
  • Who funds SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF EAST CENTRAL INDIANA INC ↗
  • Who funds Monetary Investment for Lactation Consultant Certification ↗
  • Who funds SANA SPACE INC ↗
  • Who funds Mid-Ohio Foodbank ↗
  • Who funds LIFECARE ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds COLUMBUS CHILDREN'S THEATRE ↗
  • Who funds SMILE TRAIN INC ↗
  • Who funds YOUTH HAVEN INC ↗
  • Who funds INVEST IN KIDS ↗
  • Who funds COLUMBUS ASSOCIATION FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Jpmorgan Chase FoundationNY10.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Hazelbaker Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Hazelbaker Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Youth Haven Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 27 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Hazelbaker’s filings →

More from the funding graph