Skip to content
Keymer Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Keymer 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.

$1k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

International$132kReligion$36kHealth$31kHuman Services$13kHousing & Shelter$10kEnvironment$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$249k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DYNAMIC CATHOLIC$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 (FY17–18, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%OPERATION BOOTSTRAP INC: $3k → 10%BIKES FOR THE WORLD: $10k → 8%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
IL
WI
NY
MA
MO
KY
VA
MD
DC
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.

82%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$191k · 6 repeat orgs$43k to everyone else

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
7

Total granted

$191k
$43k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
+36%

Still filing today

83%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalHuman ServicesReligionEnvironmentPhilanthropyOther
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

  • CI
    CHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA
    7× · 2017–2023 · $111k · revenue +3%
  • SMILE TRAIN INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $31k · revenue +19%
  • IC
    INTERNATIONAL CRISIS AID INC
    2× · 2019–2021 · $13k · revenue +20%

Funded once

  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +36%
  • BF
    Bikes for the World Inc
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +5%
  • OA
    ONE ACRE FUND
    one grant, 2017 · $7k
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
Direct Action for Women Now World-Wide Inc Formerly Indias Daughters Inc
Philanthropy
2
World Relief Corp of National Association of Evangelicals

To boldly engage the world's greatest crises in partnership with the church.

International
3
Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition

The mission of the global alliance for improved nutrition (gain) is to improve the consumption of healthier diets for all, especially the most vulnerable, by improving the availability, affordability, desirability, and sustainability of…

Food & Nutrition
4
Charity Global Inc

Charity: water is a non-profit organization bringing clean and safe water to people around the world. continued on schedule o.

Human Services
5
Floresta Usa Incorporated

Plant with purpose, a christian nonprofit organization, reverses deforestation and poverty around the world by transforming the lives of the rural poor. we do this through: - watershed restoration & regenerative agriculture - savings…

International
6
International Needs

International needs has the vision to transform lives and change communities by helping christian nationals serve both god and neighbor within their own countries.

—
7
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
8
Train the Nations
Religion
9
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
10
Impact in the World Trough Healthcare Inc

no

International
11
International Youth Foundation

Iyf is a global ngo that prepares young people to be healthy, productive and engaged citizens.

International
12
Solar Cookers International

The mission of Solar Cookers International is to improve human health, economic well-being, womens empowerment, and the environment by promoting climate-friendly solar cooking for vulnerable populations worldwide.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Evidence Action; the most unlike its peers is The Dynamic Catholic Institute. 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

11 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. 11 of the 13 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
9/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA: $110,750 · InternationalCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USAHABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL INC: $10,000 · InternationalHABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL INCEVIDENCE ACTION: $5,000 · InternationalSMILE TRAIN INC: $31,250 · OtherSMILE TRAIN INCORDER OF THE SUFFERING HEARTS: $22,000 · OtherORDER OF THE SUFFERING HEARTSONE ACRE FUND: $7,000 · OtherONE ACRE FUNDINTERNATIONAL CRISIS AID INC: $13,000 · Human ServicesINTERNATIONA…Bikes for the World Inc: $10,000 · Human ServicesBikes for th…OPERATION BOOTSTRAP: $3,000 · Human ServicesOPERATION BO…Direction for Our Times: $12,000 · ReligionTHE DYNAMIC CATHOLIC INSTITUTE: $2,000 · ReligionCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $5,000 · EnvironmentAMOUD FOUNDATION: $3,000 · Philanthropy
International$125,750Other$60,250Human Services$26,000Religion$14,000Environment$5,000Philanthropy$3,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA: $110,750 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetSMILE TRAIN INC: $31,250 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CRISIS AID INC: $13,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetDirection for Our Times: $12,000 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBikes for the World Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEVIDENCE ACTION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMOUD FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOPERATION BOOTSTRAP: $3,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTHE DYNAMIC CATHOLIC INSTITUTE: $2,000 over 2y, 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.

American Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Endowment FoundationOH10.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Keymer Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Keymer Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%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
    2get 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.

    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 13 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 Keymer’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