Skip to content
Lima 370 Charity Foundation Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Lima 370 Charity Foundation Inc

Provide financial support for youth activities, including education and sports Hospitals and local police and fire organizations, and for all other charitable purposes incidental thereto.

$644k
Granted FY2025still arriving
20
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$31k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0179% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Youth Development$297kEducation$251kPhilanthropy$221kHuman Services$201kCrime & Legal$138kReligion$118kRecreation & Sports$116kMembership Benefit$108kOther$0
02FY2025 · 20 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 20 grants below total $369,600, the rows itemized in this filing. The $644,494 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $274,894 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k19 grants · $364k
$15,400
Median grant
1
States reached
$310k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Northwest Ohio Literacy Council$30,500
Individual grant recipient$29,500
Elida Band Boosters$26,400
Masters HI-12$24,000
Crime Stoppers$24,000
Charity for the Children$23,500
Lima Shrine Club$22,000
Ava Ray Foundation$19,900
The Cole Collection$19,200
Family Promise of Lima-Allen County$15,400
FOPA$15,200
Lions Activity Fund$14,400
NEC Foundation$14,400
PASS$14,400
FOP 750 Corp$14,400
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 (FY19–25, $151k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Family Promise of Lima-Allen County: $16k → 13%Family Promise of Lima-Allen County: $15k → 13%Family Promise of Lima-Allen County: $15k → 13%PASS: $14k → 13%PASS: $12k → 13%Family Promise of Lima-Allen County: $12k → 13%PASS: $12k → 13%PASS: $12k → 13%FAMILY PROMISE: $11k → 13%PASS: $11k → 13%PASS: $11k → 13%PASS: $10k → 13%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.1M · 25 repeat orgs$124k to everyone else

25 repeat relationships: 17 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
8

Total granted

$2.1M
$68k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+68%
+480%

Still filing today

24%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $56k 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
Human ServicesYouth DevelopmentAnimalsOther
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

  • PA
    Prevention Awareness Support Services
    7× · 2019–2025 · $82k · revenue +294%
  • FP
    FAMILY PROMISE OF NORTHWEST OH
    5× · 2021–2025 · $69k · revenue +68%
  • NO
    NORTHWEST OHIO LITERACY COUNCIL INC
    4× · 2018–2025 · $65k · revenue +46% · 27% of their budget

Funded once

  • MH
    MASTER HI-12
    one grant, 2017 · $27k
  • F2
    FOP 21 SCOUTING PROGRAMS
    one grant, 2017 · $14k
  • TC
    The Cole Collection
    one grant, 2024 · $11k
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. 7 of the 36 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Masters HI-12: $186,000 · OtherMasters HI-12Individual grant recipient: $150,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCrime Stoppers: $138,000 · OtherCrime StoppersSHRINERS INTERNATIONAL: $118,000 · OtherSHRINERS INTERNATIONALFOPA: $114,000 · OtherFOPAFOP 750 Corp: $110,200 · OtherFOP 750 CorpLions Activity Fund: $109,200 · OtherLions Activity FundFOP Lodge 21: $108,200 · OtherFOP Lodge 21NEC Foundation: $105,200 · OtherNEC FoundationFOP 21 Scouting: $97,200 · OtherFOP Charities: $91,200 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $90,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $80,000 · OtherNORTHWEST OHIO LITERACY COUNCIL INC: $64,900 · Other+18 more: $342,195 · Other+18 morePrevention Awareness Support Services: $82,000 · Human ServicesFAMILY PROMISE OF NORTHWEST OH: $69,150 · Human ServicesELIDA BAND BOOSTERS: $106,200 · Youth DevelopmentHUMANE SOCIETY OF ALLEN COUNTY: $30,800 · Animals
Other$1,904,295Human Services$151,150Youth Development$106,200Animals$30,800

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetELIDA BAND BOOSTERS: $106,200 over 7y, 61% of budgetPrevention Awareness Support Services: $82,000 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetFAMILY PROMISE OF NORTHWEST OH: $69,150 over 5y, 4.3% of budgetNORTHWEST OHIO LITERACY COUNCIL INC: $64,900 over 4y, 27% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF ALLEN COUNTY: $30,800 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetAllen County Council on Aging Inc: $21,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetOHIO STATE EAGLES CHARITY FUND INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% 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 ELIDA BAND BOOSTERS ↗
  • Who funds Prevention Awareness Support Services ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY PROMISE OF NORTHWEST OH ↗
  • Who funds NORTHWEST OHIO LITERACY COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF ALLEN COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds Allen County Council on Aging Inc ↗
  • Who funds OHIO STATE EAGLES CHARITY FUND INC ↗

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.

United Way of Greater…
United Way of Greater Lima IncOH13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of Greater Lima Inc

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 Lima 370 Charity Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lima 370 Charity Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%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
    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 · 0–5%
    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 36 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 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 Lima 370 Charity’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