Skip to content
Jeanne M Mithun Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Jeanne M Mithun 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.

$450k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$100k
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$842kCrime & Legal$403kRecreation & Sports$282kHuman Services$38kHealth$3kArts & Culture$2k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$100,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$4.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNITED HEROES LEAGUE$100,000
CAN DO CANINES$100,000
NORTHWOODS HUMANE SOCIETY$100,000
ST PAUL POLICE K-9 FOUNDATION$100,000
THE HOC ROSE SANCTUARY RESCUE$50,000
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 (FY24–24, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND: $3k → 9%ANCHOR HOUSE: $37k → 11%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.5M · 6 repeat orgs$58k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +57% since the first grant, against +22% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
5

Total granted

$1.5M
$58k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+57%
+22%

Still filing today

100%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHuman ServicesCrime & LegalRecreation & SportsArts & CultureOther
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

  • SP
    ST PAUL POLICE K-9 FOUNDATION
    7× · 2019–2025 · $403k · revenue +74% · 36% of their budget
  • CD
    CAN DO CANINES
    8× · 2018–2025 · $389k · revenue +10%
  • UH
    UNITED HEROES LEAGUE
    5× · 2021–2025 · $282k · revenue +90%

Funded once

  • ANCHOR HOUSE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $37k · revenue +36%
  • UR
    UNDERDOG RESCUE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue +4%
  • GE
    GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND INC
    one grant, 2024 · $3k · revenue +22%
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
One Starfish Rehoming Connections Inc

Rehoming and sanctuary for dogs in need.

Animals
2
St Clouds Rescue
Animals
3
Throw a Dog a Bone Dog Rescue

Throw a Dog a Bone is an all-breed dog rescue located in Austin, TX. We focus on saving dogs primarily in the rural shelters in South Texas. Many of these shelters have no exposure and very few resources. Our mission is to rescue as many…

Animals
4
Hound Rescue Inc

Our mission is to give at-risk hounds a second chance for an enriched life while educating the community and strengthening the human-dog bond.

Animals
5
Pets Without Partners

Find homes for homeless/abandoned dogs. Provide full vet car and housing while awaiting adoption,

Animals
6
The Adoptable Dog
Animals
7
Their Lives Matter

Dog rescue and care nurturing finding a home

Animals
8
Pets Return Home

The organization seeks to reduce the unecessary killing and suffering of healthy adoptable dogs at animal rescue and shelter organizations

Animals
9
No Dogs Left Behind
Animals
10
Hope Fur Paws Rescue

To help injured, abandoned and unwanted animals. We provide food, vet care that includes heartworm prevention and spay or neuter services, shelter and anything else needed.

Animals
11
Where the Wild Things Are Rescue in

The rescue and rehabilitation of canines.

Animals
12
Rescue Coop
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Guiding Eyes for the Blind Inc; the most unlike its peers is Hoc Rose Sanctuary Rescue. 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
8/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NORTHWOODS HUMANE SOCIETY: $317,680 · AnimalsNORTHWOODS HUMANE SOCIETYHOC ROSE SANCTUARY RESCUE: $75,000 · AnimalsHOC ROSE SANCTUARY RESCUETHE BOND BETWEEN: $45,457 · AnimalsTHE BOND BETWEEN+1 more: $15,000 · AnimalsST PAUL POLICE K-9 FOUNDATION: $402,897 · Crime & LegalST PAUL POLICE K-9 FOUNDATIONCAN DO CANINES: $388,993 · OtherCAN DO CANINES+1 more: $1,000 · OtherUNITED HEROES LEAGUE: $281,531 · Recreation & SportsUNITED HEROES LEAGUEANCHOR HOUSE INC: $37,152 · Human ServicesGUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND INC: $3,184 · Human ServicesTOWN PLAYERSINC: $2,000 · Arts & Culture
Animals$453,137Crime & Legal$402,897Other$389,993Recreation & Sports$281,531Human Services$40,336Arts & Culture$2,000

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 budgetST PAUL POLICE K-9 FOUNDATION: $402,897 over 7y, 36% of budgetCAN DO CANINES: $388,993 over 8y, 1.8% of budgetNORTHWOODS HUMANE SOCIETY: $317,680 over 7y, 7.0% of budgetUNITED HEROES LEAGUE: $281,531 over 5y, 1.9% of budgetHOC ROSE SANCTUARY RESCUE: $75,000 over 2y, 42% of budgetTHE BOND BETWEEN: $45,457 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetANCHOR HOUSE INC: $37,152 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetUNDERDOG RESCUE INC: $15,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetGUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND INC: $3,184 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTOWN PLAYERSINC: $2,000 over 1y, 3.4% 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.

Mightycause Charitabl…Charities Aid Foundat…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Mightycause Charitable FoundationFL12.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Jeanne M Mithun Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jeanne M Mithun Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 45%
  • Anchor House Inc: 45% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 Jeanne M Mithun’s 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