Skip to content

· Private foundation

Letaw Family Foundation Inc Co Jtc Trust

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.

$118k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$50k
Largest
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$287kArts & Culture$167kYouth Development$112kCrime & Legal$35kHousing & Shelter$35k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $68k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$27,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND$50,000
BALTIMORE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA$27,500
GIRLS ON THE RUN$25,000
NEW FUTURES$15,000
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 (FY20–25, $287k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%NEW FUTURES: $15k → 14%NEW FUTURES: $13k → 14%NEW FUTURES: $13k → 14%NEW FUTURES: $13k → 14%HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND: $50k → 19%HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND: $44k → 19%NEW FUTURES: $10k → 14%HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND: $40k → 19%HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND: $30k → 19%HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND: $30k → 19%HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND: $30k → 19%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$636k · 7 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
0

Total granted

$636k
$0

Still filing today

100%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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 ServicesArts & CultureYouth DevelopmentCrime & LegalHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • TH
    THE HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $224k · revenue +16%
  • BS
    BALTIMORE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $120k · revenue +49%
  • NF
    NEW FUTURES
    5× · 2021–2025 · $63k · revenue +129%

Funded once

    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
    04the grantee network

    7 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.

    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)
    7/7
    Grantees still filing
    4/7
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    THE HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND INC: $224,475 · Human ServicesTHE HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND INCNEW FUTURES: $62,500 · Human ServicesNEW FUTURESBALTIMORE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC: $119,500 · Arts & CultureBALTIMORE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA …CREATIVE ALLIANCE INC: $47,500 · Arts & CultureCREATIVE ALLIANCE INCGIRLS ON THE RUN - DC: $112,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS ON THE RUN - …RESTORATIVE RESPONSE BALTIMORE INC: $35,000 · Crime & LegalSANCTUARY VILLAGE: $35,000 · Housing & Shelter
    Human Services$286,975Arts & Culture$167,000Youth Development$112,000Crime & Legal$35,000Housing & Shelter$35,000

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

    25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND INC: $224,475 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetBALTIMORE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC: $119,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN - DC: $112,000 over 6y, 5.0% of budgetNEW FUTURES: $62,500 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetCREATIVE ALLIANCE INC: $47,500 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetRESTORATIVE RESPONSE BALTIMORE INC: $35,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetSANCTUARY VILLAGE: $35,000 over 3y, 5.1% 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.

    • Who funds THE HOUSE OF RUTH MARYLAND INC ↗
    • Who funds BALTIMORE SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA INC ↗
    • Who funds GIRLS ON THE RUN - DC ↗
    • Who funds NEW FUTURES ↗
    • Who funds CREATIVE ALLIANCE INC ↗
    • Who funds RESTORATIVE RESPONSE BALTIMORE INC ↗
    • Who funds SANCTUARY VILLAGE ↗

    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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

    Amazonsmile FoundationWA3.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: 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 Letaw Family Foundation Inc Co Jtc Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Letaw Family Foundation Inc Co Jtc Trust. 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%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 11%
    • The House of Ruth Maryland Inc: 19% of income from government
    • Baltimore Symphony Orchestra Inc: 11% of income from government
    • Restorative Response Baltimore Inc: 4% of income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–40%
    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 7 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 Letaw Family Foundation Inc Co Jtc’s filings →

    More from the funding graph