Skip to content
Helen Kimberly Jones at a glance

· Private foundation

Helen Kimberly Jones

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$42k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Animals$324kHealth$10k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
$8,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$833k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC$10,000
AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION$10,000
APPALACHIAN WILDLIFE REFUGE$8,000
BROTHER WOLF ANIMAL RESCUE INC$5,000
AMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION$5,000
HUMANE SOCIETY OF BUNCOMBE COUNTY$4,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%VOICE FOR THE ANIMALS: $5k → 14%AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION: $10k → 17%AMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION: $5k → 14%CHARLIES ANGELS ANIMAL RESCUE: $3k → 12%ANIMAL HAVEN OF ASHEVILLE: $12k → 12%ANIMAL HAVEN OF ASHEVILLE: $10k → 12%ANIMAL HAVEN OF ASHEVILLE: $10k → 12%ANIMAL HAVEN OF ASHEVILLE: $10k → 12%ANIMAL HAVEN OF ASHEVILLE: $10k → 12%ANIMAL HAVEN OF ASHEVILLE: $7k → 12%ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $21k → 12%ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $20k → 12%ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $20k → 12%ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $20k → 12%ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $18k → 12%ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $10k → 12%ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $10k → 12%ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $8k → 12%WILD FOR LIFE CENTER FOR: $8k → 12%WILD FOR LIFE CENTER FOR: $8k → 12%WILD FOR LIFE CENTER FOR: $7k → 12%WILD FOR LIFE CENTER FOR: $7k → 12%WILD FOR LIFE CENTER FOR: $7k → 12%WILD FOR LIFE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION: $5k → 12%WILD FOR LIFE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION: $5k → 12%APPALACHIAN WILDLIFE REFUGE: $10k → 12%APPALACHIAN WILDLIFE REFUGE: $10k → 12%APPALACHIAN WILDLIFE REFUGE: $8k → 12%APPALACHIAN WILDLIFE REFUGE: $4k → 12%APPALACHIAN WILDLIFE REFUGE: $3k → 12%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.
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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$311k · 7 repeat orgs$23k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +91% since the first grant, against +51% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
2

Total granted

$311k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+91%
+51%

Still filing today

86%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

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

  • AH
    ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $127k · revenue +196%
  • AH
    Animal Haven of Asheville
    6× · 2018–2023 · $59k · revenue +80%
  • AW
    APPALACHIAN WILDLIFE REFUGE
    6× · 2018–2025 · $40k · revenue +91%

Funded once

  • VF
    VOICE FOR THE ANIMALS
    one grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue -37%
  • CA
    Charlies Angels Animal Rescuegraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue +51%
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
Carolina Animal Network

we are a small animal rescue. We help the community by assisting with vet care and rehoming animals they cannot keep. We also pull dogs cats kittens and puppies from local kill shelters when they run out of space, we provide those animals…

Animals
2
Pom and the Hound Animal Refuge

Animal Welfare

—
3
Animals First Rescue of the Carolinas Inc

Rescue unwanted dogs and cats from high kill shelters and other dire circumstances. Provide veterinary care shelter and love until the pet is placed into an appropriate new home.

Animals
4
Promoting Animal Welfare in North Carolina

Our main program is providing vet care to animals dropped at or rescued from the local animal shelter. This is the only service we provide and where our expenses go. We spay/neuter animals adopted from the shelter and provide vet care to…

Animals
5
Wild Souls Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation
Animals
6
Anas Safe Haven Rescue Inc

Animal Welfare

Animals
7
Forever Wild Wildlife Rescue
Animals
8
Pisgah Animal Welfare Society Inc
Animals
9
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
10
Bessies Creek Farm Animal Sanctuary & Rescue

Bessies Creek Farm Animal Sanctuary & Rescue is a non profit animal rescue and sanctuary.

—
11
Angel Wing Acres Animal Welfare Soc Lombas
Animals
12
Happy Hen Animal Sanctuary
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Asheville Humane Society Inc; the most unlike its peers is American Humane Association. 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

10 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. 10 of the 11 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $126,500 · AnimalsASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INCAnimal Haven of Asheville: $59,000 · AnimalsAnimal Haven of AshevilleAPPALACHIAN WILDLIFE REFUGE: $40,000 · AnimalsAPPALACHIAN WILDLIFE REFUGEWild for Life Center for: $36,500 · AnimalsWild for Life Center forBrother Wolf Animal Rescue Inc: $20,000 · AnimalsBrother Wolf Animal Rescue Inc+4 more: $23,000 · Animals+4 moreHUMANE SOCIETY OF BUNCOMBE COUNTY: $19,000 · OtherHUMANE SO…WILD FOR LIFE CENTER FOR REHABILITATION: $10,000 · OtherWILD FOR …
Animals$305,000Other$29,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetASHEVILLE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $126,500 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetAnimal Haven of Asheville: $59,000 over 6y, 9.8% of budgetAPPALACHIAN WILDLIFE REFUGE: $40,000 over 6y, 2.8% of budgetWild for Life Center for: $36,500 over 5y, 19% of budgetBrother Wolf Animal Rescue Inc: $20,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF BUNCOMBE COUNTY: $19,000 over 4y, 4.5% of budgetAMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCharlies Angels Animal Rescue: $3,000 over 1y, 1.0% 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.

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.

Earl M Wilson Tuw FBO…The Community Foundat…Paypal Charitable Giv…Amazonsmile Foundation
Earl M Wilson Tuw FBO Nc SocMO13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Earl M Wilson Tuw FBO Nc Soc · The Community Foundation of Western North Carolina Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving 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 Helen Kimberly Jones funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Helen Kimberly Jones. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 11 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 Helen Kimberly Jones’ filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home