Skip to content
John & Mary R Markle Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Private foundation

John & Mary R Markle 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.

$2.3M
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$1.5M
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, FY2021 to 2025.

Employment$6.1MCivil Rights$1.5MCommunity Improvement$1.2MSocial Science$785kHuman Services$300kInternational$154kEducation$153kEnvironment$135kOther$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $5k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $789k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.5M
$75,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$129M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JOBS FOR THE FUTURE$1,500,000
UNIDOSUS$225,000
NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE INC$214,114
ASSOCIATION OF CHAMBER OF COMMERCE EXECUTIVES FOUNDATION$125,000
SOUTHWEST ECONOMIC SOLUTIONS INC DBA MISIDE WEALTH$75,000
LOCAL INITIATIVES SUPPORT CORPORATION$75,000
CONCILIO DE ORGANIZACIONES HISPANAS$75,000
CICP FOUNDATION INC$2,500
NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN FUND INC$1,000
INSTITUTE FOR WORKFORCE EXCELLENCE INC$1,000
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 (FY21–25, $1.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 89% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%AUSTIN AREA URBAN LEAGUE: $75k → 10%SOUTHWEST ECONOMIC SOLUTIONS: $75k → 21%MI CASA RESOURCE CENTER: $38k → 12%URBAN LEAGUE OF GREATER NEW ORLEANS CO INC: $75k → 23%AUSTIN AREA URBAN LEAGUE INC: $38k → 10%MI CASA RESOURCE CENTER: $38k → 12%URBAN LEAGUE OF GREATER NEW ORLEANS CO INC: $75k → 23%AUSTIN AREA URBAN LEAGUE: $38k → 10%MICASA RESOURCE CENTER: $38k → 12%URBAN LEAGUE OF GREATER NEW ORLEANS CO INC: $2k → 23%MI CASA RESOURCE CENTER: $38k → 12%NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE INC: $300k → 17%NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE INC: $214k → 17%NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE: $100k → 17%NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE INC: $100k → 17%NATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE INC: $75k → 17%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

MN
MI
NY
MA
IN
PA
CA
CO
VA
MD
DC
LA
GA
TX
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$9.9M · 24 repeat orgs$272k to everyone else

24 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
5

Total granted

$9.9M
$196k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+39%

Still filing today

96%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $76k went to new ones.

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

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

’21’22’23’24’25
EmploymentHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementSocial ScienceInternationalRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $535k · revenue +159%
  • LOCAL INITIATIVES SUPPORT CORPORATION
    4× · 2022–2025 · $375k · revenue +25%
  • AO
    Association of Chamber of Commerce Executives Foundation
    3× · 2023–2025 · $325k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • EU
    EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2023 · $100k
  • SOUTHWEST ECONOMIC SOLUTIONS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $75k · revenue +39%
  • NATIONAL PARTNERSHIP FOR WOMEN AND FAMILIESgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $18k · revenue +499%
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
Partnership for Public Service Inc

Making our government work better is a daunting task, and we are a small organization seeking to transform a government that employs millions of civilians and manages trillions of dollars in taxpayer revenue needed to protect public…

Employment
3
American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

The american enterprise institute is a community of scholars and supporters committed to expanding liberty, increasing individual opportunity, and strengthening free enterprise. aei pursues these ideals through independent thinking and the…

Social Science
4
The Center for Employment Security Education and Research Inc

The center for employment security education and research (ceser) is the leading education, research and information technology center, focusing on workforce development and unemployment insurance issues.

Social Science
5
Business - Higher Education Forum

The business-higher education forum is a national network that connects corporate and college leaders to identify and build the talent solutions that address priority talent needs for employers and the american economy. corporate…

Education
6
United Way of Greater Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey

United way's mission is to end intergenerational poverty in our region by harnessing, leveraging and strategically investing the collective power of donors, advocates and volunteers, to help individuals and families break the cycle of…

Philanthropy
7
Jobsfirstnyc

Jobsfirstnyc's mission is to create and advance solutions that break down barriers and transform the systems supporting young adults and their communities in the pursuit of economic opportunities.

Youth Development
8
Workforce Professionals Training Institute

Wpti's mission is to build the capacities of people, programs, and organizations that provide job training, placement, and career guidance for individuals and to advocate for policies that promote economic opportunities for all.

Employment
9
The National Association of State Workforce Agencies

The national association of state workforce agencies (naswa) mission is to enhance the state workforce agencies' ability to accomplish their goals, statutory roles and responsibilities.

—
10
National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering Inc

To provide leadership and support for the national effort to increase the representation of successful african american, native american and latinx women and men in engineering and technology, math, and science-based careers.

Civil Rights
11
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

—
12
American Gas Association

American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Local Initiatives Support Corporation; the most unlike its peers is Eno Transportation Foundation. 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

30 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. 30 of the 34 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
30/30
Grantees still filing
15/30
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JOBS FOR THE FUTURE INC: $5,000,000 · EmploymentJOBS FOR THE FUTURE INC+4 more: $531,000 · Employment+4 moreUNIDOSUS: $625,000 · OtherUNIDOSUSAssociation of Chamber of Commerce Executives Foundation: $325,000 · OtherAssociation of Chambe…Goodwill Industries Inc: $150,000 · OtherGoodwill Industries I…PATHSTONE CORPORATION: $150,000 · OtherPATHSTONE CORPORATIONCOUNCIL OF SPANISH SPEAKING ORGANIZATIONS INC: $150,000 · OtherCOUNCIL OF SPANISH SP…NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE ENERGY OFFICIALS: $135,000 · OtherNATIONAL ASSOCIATION …ENO TRANSPORTATION FOUNDATION: $110,000 · OtherENO TRANSPORTATION FO…EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE: $100,000 · OtherSOUTHWEST ECONOMIC SOLUTIONS INC DBA MISIDE WEALTH: $75,000 · OtherGOODWILL INDUSTRIES INTERNATIONAL INC: $100,000 · Other+6 more: $54,000 · OtherNATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE INC: $789,114 · Human ServicesNATIONAL URBAN…URBAN LEAGUE OF LOUISIANA: $151,500 · Human ServicesURBAN LEAGUE O…MI CASA RESOURCE CENTER: $150,000 · Human ServicesMI CASA RESOUR…Austin Area Urban League: $150,000 · Human ServicesAustin Area Ur…SOUTHWEST ECONOMIC SOLUTIONS INC: $75,000 · Human ServicesSOUTHWEST ECON…THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $534,959 · Social ScienceTHE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: $250,000 · Social ScienceLOCAL INITIATIVES SUPPORT CORPORATION: $375,000 · Community Improvement+1 more: $12,500 · Community ImprovementCenter for a New American Security Inc: $150,000 · International+1 more: $4,000 · InternationalTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $150,000 · Education+1 more: $2,500 · Education
Employment$5,531,000Other$1,974,000Human Services$1,315,614Social Science$784,959Community Improvement$387,500International$154,000Education$152,500

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetJOBS FOR THE FUTURE INC: $5,000,000 over 2y, 3.7% of budgetNATIONAL URBAN LEAGUE INC: $789,114 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetUNIDOSUS: $625,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetTHE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC: $534,959 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetLOCAL INITIATIVES SUPPORT CORPORATION: $375,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetAssociation of Chamber of Commerce Executives Foundation: $325,000 over 3y, 9.1% of budgetTHE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION: $250,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetURBAN LEAGUE OF LOUISIANA: $151,500 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $150,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMI CASA RESOURCE CENTER: $150,000 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetGoodwill Industries Inc: $150,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSER-JOBS FOR PROGRESS OF THE TEXAS GULF COAST INC: $150,000 over 2y, 5.9% of budgetCenter for a New American Security Inc: $150,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetCOUNCIL OF SPANISH SPEAKING ORGANIZATIONS INC: $150,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetGOODWILL OF NORTH GEORGIA INC: $150,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetAustin Area Urban League: $150,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetGOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $150,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE ENERGY OFFICIALS: $135,000 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetENO TRANSPORTATION FOUNDATION: $110,000 over 2y, 3.1% of budgetGOODWILL INDUSTRIES INTERNATIONAL INC: $100,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetInstitute for Workforce Excellence Inc: $81,000 over 3y, 6.2% of budgetSOUTHWEST ECONOMIC SOLUTIONS INC: $75,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetNEW AMERICA FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL PARTNERSHIP FOR WOMEN AND FAMILIES: $17,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCICP FOUNDATION INC: $12,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCOUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSESAME WORKSHOP: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION BOULDER COUNTY: $2,000 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.

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.

UnidosusJpmorgan Chase Founda…Enterprise Holdings F…The Bank of America C…Charities Aid Foundat…The Blackbaud Giving …American Online Givin…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
UnidosusDC15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Unidosus · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 John & Mary R Markle Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from John & Mary R Markle Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
  • Goodwill Industries International Inc: 35% of income from government
  • Jobs for the Future Inc: 11% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get 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
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 34 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 John & Mary R Markle’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