Skip to content
Keown Robert J Tuw at a glance

· Private foundation

Keown Robert J Tuw

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.

$60k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Human Services$169kHealth$85kYouth Development$45kHousing & Shelter$35kInternational$20kEducation$10k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
OUR HOUSE GRIEF SUPPORT CENTER$20,000
ST LOUISE RESOURCE SERVICES$20,000
HIS FAMILY SERVICES$10,000
LESTONNAC FREE CLINIC$10,000
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 (FY20–20, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%LOS ANGELES HOUSE OF RUTH: $15k → 14%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.

59%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$214k · 5 repeat orgs$150k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +18% since the first grant, against -8% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 2 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

5
11

Total granted

$214k
$120k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
-8%

Still filing today

80%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthPhilanthropyEducationOther
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

  • OH
    OUR HOUSE GRIEF SUPPORT CENTER
    4× · 2021–2025 · $80k · revenue +18%
  • RP
    RM PYLES BOYS CAMP
    3× · 2021–2023 · $45k · revenue +1%
  • YO
    YWCA OF GLENDALE AND PASADENA
    3× · 2020–2022 · $24k · revenue +24%

Funded once

  • TC
    THE CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2023 · $20k
  • LA
    LOS ANGELES HOUSE OF RUTHgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue +98%
  • KC
    KINGDOM CAUSES BELLFLOWER
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -43%
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
Westla Homeless

WesttLA Homeless recruits volunteers to assist the homeless persons to make use of city and county services for housing, healthcare, addiction services, legal services as well as provides clothing, sanitation and other supplies without…

Human Services
2
Home for Homeless Women
—
3
The Young Women's Christian Association of Yonkers

Ywca is dedicated to empowering women and promoting peace, health, justice, freedom and dignity for all.

—
4
The San Francisco Particular Council of the Society of St Vincent De Paul

The mission of the st. vincent de paul society of san francisco (svdp-sf) is to offer hope and service on a direct person-to-person basis, working to break the cycles of homelessness and domestic violence.

Human Services
5
Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Santa Rosa

Catholic charities creates access to opportunities for self-sufficiency by providing innovative and compassionate services to people of all backgrounds, beliefs, and cultures.

Human Services
6
Mary's Mercy Center

Mary's Mercy Center reaffirms the dignity of the poor and marginalized by providing food, clothing, and transitional housing to homeless families and individuals.

Food & Nutrition
7
Bread of Refuge Inc

Bread of Refuge is a food pantry that distributes over 1600 banana boxes of food every month to families in need. We also feed 75-to-100 homeless people every week.

Human Services
8
Downtown Women's Center

Housing, employment, and physical and mental health services for women overcoming homelessness and poverty.

Human Services
9
The Miracle House Foundation

Mentorship and housing assistant for women returning from incarceration

Human Services
10
Catholic Charities Diocese of San Diego

Catholic Charities provides social services and administers various governmental and social programs. Designed to meet the challenge of the ever-changing community by utilizing spiritual, human and financial resources, our programs enable…

Human Services
11
Interval House

The mission of the organization is to ensure safety and stability for people who are battered, abused, homeless or at risk; to create public awareness about the epidemic of violence; and to mobilize the community to prevent violence and…

Human Services
12
Yolo Wayfarer Center Christian Fourth and Hope

Provide food, clothing, shelter, and residential treatment services to the homeless. Outreach and transitional housing services are also provided.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ywca of Glendale and Pasadena; the most unlike its peers is The Children's Foundation Inc. 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

13 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. 13 of the 18 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
6/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RM PYLES BOYS CAMP: $45,000 · OtherRM PYLES BOYS CAMPARTS AND SERVICES FOR DISABLED INCORPORA: $35,000 · OtherARTS AND SERVICES FOR DISABLED INCORPORALESTONNAC FREE CLINIC: $30,000 · OtherLESTONNAC FREE CLINICYWCA OF GLENDALE AND PASADENA: $24,000 · OtherYWCA OF GLENDALE AND PASADENAST LOUISE RESOURCE SERVICES: $20,000 · OtherST LOUISE RESOURCE SERVICESCALIFORNIA AQUATIC THERAPY: $10,000 · OtherSt Francis Center: $10,000 · OtherHIS FAMILY SERVICES: $10,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY OUTPOST SERVICES: $10,000 · OtherChristian Outreach Appeal dba Christian Outreach in Action: $10,000 · OtherOPERATION SAVE THE STREETS: $10,000 · OtherOUR HOUSE GRIEF SUPPORT CENTER: $80,000 · HealthOUR HOUSE GRIEF SUPPORT …LOS ANGELES HOUSE OF RUTH: $15,000 · Human ServicesLOS ANGELES …Women Crowned in Glory Safe Passage: $10,000 · Human ServicesWomen Crowne…FINALLY FAMILY HOMES: $10,000 · Human ServicesFINALLY FAMI…WESTSIDE PACIFIC VILLAGES: $5,000 · Human ServicesWESTSIDE PAC…THE CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · PhilanthropyKINGDOM CAUSES BELLFLOWER: $10,000 · Education
Other$214,000Health$80,000Human Services$40,000Philanthropy$20,000Education$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetOUR HOUSE GRIEF SUPPORT CENTER: $80,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetRM PYLES BOYS CAMP: $45,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetLESTONNAC FREE CLINIC: $30,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetYWCA OF GLENDALE AND PASADENA: $24,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetST LOUISE RESOURCE SERVICES: $20,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetLOS ANGELES HOUSE OF RUTH: $15,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetKINGDOM CAUSES BELLFLOWER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSt Francis Center: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWomen Crowned in Glory Safe Passage: $10,000 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetChristian Outreach Appeal dba Christian Outreach in Action: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetWESTSIDE PACIFIC VILLAGES: $5,000 over 1y, 2.0% 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.

California Community …Kaiser Foundation Hos…Adams Mastrovich Fam …Shelter Partnership I…United Way IncThe Rose Hills Founda…The Ahmanson Foundati…The Ralph M Parsons F…Conrad N Hilton Found…Orange County Communi…American Endowment Fo…Network for Good
California Community FoundationCA19.3× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Adams Mastrovich Fam Fdn · Shelter Partnership Inc · United Way Inc · The Rose Hills Foundation · The Ahmanson Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · Conrad N Hilton Foundation · Orange County Community Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Network for Good

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 Keown Robert J Tuw funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Keown Robert J Tuw. 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report 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 18 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 Keown Robert J Tuw’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