Skip to content
Kennys Kids at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Private foundation

Kennys Kids

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.

$482k
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$128k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2025.

Health$552kPhilanthropy$474kHuman Services$290kArts & Culture$191kInternational$180kFood & Nutrition$70kEducation$58kPublic Safety & Disaster$45kOther$0
02FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $24k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $101k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $358k
$10,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UCSF FOUNDATION$128,000
ASCENSION ILLINOIS FOUNDATION$100,000
SEDONA ARTS CENTER$75,000
WE CARE SERVICES FOR CHILDREN$55,000
MARIPOSA DR FOUNDATION$40,000
ITHACA COLLEGE$20,628
PATRIOTS JET TEAM FOUNDATION$10,000
MONKEY TAIL RANCH$10,000
SEDONA COMMUNITY FOOD BANK$10,000
TWLOHA$10,000
PROJECT FIRE BUDDIES$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE$5,000
TAYLOR FAMILY FOUNDATION$5,000
ROTARY CLUB OF SEDONA$2,500
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 (FY22–25, $460k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 42% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%MONKEY TAIL RANCH: $10k → 7%MARIPOSA DR FOUNDATION: $50k → 16%PROJECT FIRE BUDDIES: $5k → 14%MONKEY TAIL RANCH: $10k → 7%MARIPOSA DR FOUNDATION: $50k → 16%PROJECT FIRE BUDDIES: $5k → 14%MONKEY TAIL RANCH: $10k → 7%MARIPOSA DR FOUNDATION: $40k → 16%PROJECT FIRE BUDDIES: $5k → 14%MONKEY TAIL RANCH: $10k → 7%MARIPOSA DR FOUNDATION: $40k → 16%WE CARE SERVICES FOR CHILDREN: $55k → 9%WE CARE SERVICES FOR CHILDREN: $55k → 9%WE CARE SERVICES FOR CHILDREN: $50k → 9%WE CARE SERVICES FOR CHILDREN: $40k → 9%WE CARE SERVICES FOR CHILDREN: $25k → 9%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

ID
IL
NY
WY
CA
AZ
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.
$1.7M · 15 repeat orgs$89k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +28% since the first grant, against +17% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
7

Total granted

$1.7M
$80k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+17%

Still filing today

87%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEducationArts & CultureFood & NutritionHealthRecreation & 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

  • WC
    We Care Services For Children
    4× · 2022–2025 · $225k · revenue +57%
  • TT
    THE TAYLOR FAMILY FOUNDATION
    4× · 2022–2025 · $215k · revenue +47%
  • MD
    Mariposa DR Foundation
    4× · 2022–2025 · $180k · revenue +28%

Funded once

  • AC
    ALAMEDA COUNTY (KIDS HEALTH)
    one grant, 2023 · $25k
  • MA
    MAKE A WISH OF IL
    one grant, 2022 · $15k
  • BH
    BAYHILL HIGH SCHOOL
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
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
Phoenix Children's Hospital Foundation

Phoenix children's hospital foundation supports phoenix children's hospital through fundraising ensuring that the hospital continues to stay on the leading edge of pediatric medicine and is equipped to fulfill its mission to advance hope,…

Health
2
Tahoe Forest Health System Foundation

Tahoe forest health system foundation creates a culture of collaboration which facilitates the exploration of creative opportunities and solutions that result in excellence in community health care.

Health
3
Sierra Health Foundation
Health
4
Tigerfight Foundation

The detailed mission of the Tigerfight Foundation is to establish ourselves within the community as a philanthropic organization and raise funds to support The Leukemia and Lymphoma Society and Kern County families who are currently going…

Health
5
Sierra Madre Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Sff Foundation
Philanthropy
7
University of Hawaii Foundation

To unite donors' passions with the university of hawai'i's (uh) aspirations by raising philanthropic support and managing investments to benefit uh, the people of hawai'i and our future generations.

Education
8
Soteria Precision Medicine Foundation Inc

Soteria Precision Medicine Foundation is dedicated to empowering patients and physicians with personalized precision medicine solutions.

Health
9
The Firefly Foundation
Recreation & Sports
10
Frontline to Field Foundation

Frontline to field is a nonprofit organization founded from the hearts of two individuals deeply committed to the well-being of those who serve and sacrifice for others. inspired by their personal connections to the military, first…

Recreation & Sports
11
Sarcoma Foundation of America

The mission of the organization is to advocate for sarcoma patients by funding research and by increasing awareness about the disease. the organization raises money to privately fund grants for sarcoma researchers and conducts education…

Arts & Culture
12
Pacific Cancer Foundation

Mission: the mission of the pacific cancer foundation is to provide access, knowledge and support to all those affected by cancer in maui county. we do this by providing free support services to maui's cancer community. purpose: the…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Twloha Inc; the most unlike its peers is Ithaca College. 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

21 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. 21 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
12/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ASCENSION ILLINOIS FOUNDATION: $469,000 · OtherASCENSION ILLINOIS FOUNDATIONALAMEDA COUNTY (KIDS HEALTH): $25,000 · OtherWILDLAND FIREFIGHTER FOUNDATION: $30,000 · OtherHope House of Sedona: $25,000 · Other+8 more: $54,950 · Other+8 moreWe Care Services For Children: $225,000 · Human ServicesWe Care Services For Childr…Mariposa DR Foundation: $180,000 · Human ServicesMariposa DR FoundationThe Monkey Tail Ranch Inc: $40,000 · Human ServicesThe Monkey Tail Ranch Inc+1 more: $15,000 · Human ServicesUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $281,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF CALIF…ITHACA COLLEGE: $28,128 · EducationITHACA COLLEGE+1 more: $10,000 · EducationTHE TAYLOR FAMILY FOUNDATION: $215,000 · Recreation & SportsTHE TAYLOR F…SEDONA ARTS CENTER INC: $150,000 · Arts & CultureSEDONA ARTS…PATRIOTS JET TEAM FOUNDATION INC: $40,550 · Arts & CulturePATRIOTS JE…HALLIE 225: $10,000 · Arts & CultureSEDONA COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $40,000 · Food & NutritionManzanita Outreach: $30,000 · Food & NutritionTWLOHA INC: $30,000 · Health+1 more: $1,000 · Health
Other$603,950Human Services$460,000Education$319,128Recreation & Sports$215,000Arts & Culture$200,550Food & Nutrition$70,000Health$31,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $281,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetWe Care Services For Children: $225,000 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetTHE TAYLOR FAMILY FOUNDATION: $215,000 over 4y, 8.4% of budgetMariposa DR Foundation: $180,000 over 4y, 6.2% of budgetSEDONA ARTS CENTER INC: $150,000 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetPATRIOTS JET TEAM FOUNDATION INC: $40,550 over 4y, 5.2% of budgetSEDONA COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $40,000 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetThe Monkey Tail Ranch Inc: $40,000 over 4y, 4.5% of budgetManzanita Outreach: $30,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTWLOHA INC: $30,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetWILDLAND FIREFIGHTER FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetITHACA COLLEGE: $28,128 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHope House of Sedona: $25,000 over 2y, 17% of budgetPROJECT FIRE BUDDIES INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetSCORPION BOOSTER CLUB INC: $10,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetHALLIE 225: $10,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetTOMAHAWK CHARITABLE SOLUTIONS FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTHE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLIVE LIKE ROO FOUNDATION: $450 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.

Kenny's KidsArizona Community Fou…Silicon Valley Commun…Morgan Stanley Global…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Kenny's KidsAZ24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Kenny's Kids · Arizona Community Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Kennys Kids funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Kennys Kids. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–15%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Kennys Kids?

    Find your warmest path to Kennys Kids through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 Kennys Kids’ 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