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

· Public charity

Magnified Giving

To provide grants to local charities through youth participating in the youth Philanthropy education provided by Magnified Giving.

$232k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$6k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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, FY2018 to 2025.

Human Services$64kFood & Nutrition$35kHealth$21kAnimals$19kPhilanthropy$7k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $17,075, the rows itemized in this filing. The $232,283 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $215,208 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.
$5,625
Median grant
1
States reached
$3.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
4 Paws for Ability$6,250
Dayton Dream Center$5,625
JEE Foods$5,200
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 (FY18–25, $43k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 13% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%4 Paws 4 Ability: $8k → 9%Dayton Dream Center: $6k → 14%4 PAWS FOR ABILITY: $6k → 9%4 Paws for Ability: $6k → 9%4 PAWS FOR ABILITY: $6k → 9%Care Closet: $6k → 10%4 Paws 4 Ability: $5k → 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.
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 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
Freedom Tails Ohio

Animal Rescue

Animals
2
4 Paws Sake

4 Paws Sake, Inc. is a group of volunteer (we have no paid employees) dog lovers whose mission is to rescue, provide sanctuary, and ultimately to re-home abandoned, stray and neglected dogs. We also assist dogs who, because of extenuating…

Animals
3
FIGHT2FEED a Charitable Organization

To feed the needy and homeless

Food & Nutrition
4
Purple Paws 2nd Chance Rescue
Animals
5
Bi-State Pet Food Pantry

To keep pets with their families during financially difficult times.

Animals
6
K-Lees Food Pantry Nfp

Distribute food to the needy

Food & Nutrition
7
Faithful Forgotten Best Friends

Provide pet food, vaccinations, basic veterinary care and assitance with spay and neuter costs for the pets of the homeless and less fortunate in downtown Columbus area.

Animals
8
Paws Fur Hope

We rescue pets from neglect foster them and then adopt them to suitable families

Animals
9
Christina Homecare Food Pantry Inc
Food & Nutrition
10
Joeys Food Fight
Food & Nutrition
11
Columbus Cares for Cats
—
12
Advocates 4 Animals Pet Food Pantry

Advocates 4 Animals A4A Pet Pantry is a 100% volunteer 501c3 nonprofit dedicated to keeping animals with their families during financial hardship by providing pet food and spay-neuter assistance. We also operate an adoption program caring…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Freestore Foodbank Inc; the most unlike its peers is Jee Foods. 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

18 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. 18 of the 19 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/18
Grantees still filing
12/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

4 PAWS FOR ABILITY INC: $31,575 · Human Services4 PAWS FOR ABILITY INCDAYTON DREAM CENTER: $5,625 · Human ServicesDAYTON DREAM CENTERCARE CLOSET: $5,546 · Human ServicesCARE CLOSETLA SOUPE INC: $7,185 · Food & NutritionLA SOUPE INCLAST MILE FOOD RESCUE: $5,750 · Food & NutritionLAST MILE FOOD RESCUECHILDHOOD FOOD SOLUTIONS: $5,700 · Food & NutritionCHILDHOOD FOOD SOLUTIO…JEE Foods: $5,200 · Food & NutritionJEE FoodsFREESTORE FOODBANK INC: $5,105 · Food & NutritionFREESTORE FOODBANK INCPETS FOR PATIENTS: $8,153 · AnimalsPETS FOR PATIE…PROTECT 4 PAWS CO: $5,250 · AnimalsPROTECT 4 PAWS…FRANKIES FURRY FRIENDS RESCUE: $5,250 · AnimalsFRANKIES FURRY…CHEMO-UNITY LLC: $7,135 · PhilanthropyCHEMO-UNITY…1N5: $7,125 · Philanthropy1N5THE DRAGONFLY FOUNDATION: $7,350 · HealthTHE DRAGON…CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER: $6,017 · HealthCHILDREN'S…YELLOW RIBBON SUPPORT FOUNDATION: $8,376 · EducationSMILES FOR SENIORS: $7,808 · OtherSMILES FOR SEN…Sugartree Ministry Center Inc: $5,812 · OtherSugartree Mini…BARRACKS PROJECT INC: $5,146 · OtherBARRACKS PROJE…
Human Services$42,746Food & Nutrition$28,940Animals$18,653Philanthropy$14,260Health$13,367Education$8,376Other$18,766

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 budget4 PAWS FOR ABILITY INC: $31,575 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetYELLOW RIBBON SUPPORT FOUNDATION: $8,376 over 1y, 10% of budgetPETS FOR PATIENTS: $8,153 over 1y, 18% of budgetTHE DRAGONFLY FOUNDATION: $7,350 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLA SOUPE INC: $7,185 over 1y, 0.5% of budget1N5: $7,125 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER: $6,017 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSugartree Ministry Center Inc: $5,812 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetLAST MILE FOOD RESCUE: $5,750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCHILDHOOD FOOD SOLUTIONS: $5,700 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetDAYTON DREAM CENTER: $5,625 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetPROTECT 4 PAWS CO: $5,250 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetJEE Foods: $5,200 over 1y, 27% of budgetBARRACKS PROJECT INC: $5,146 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetFREESTORE FOODBANK INC: $5,105 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.

Elsa M Heisel Sule Ch…The Greater Cincinnat…Duke Energy FoundationGe Aerospace Foundati…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Elsa M Heisel Sule Charitable Trust 2005KY13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Elsa M Heisel Sule Charitable Trust 2005 · The Greater Cincinnati Foundation · Duke Energy Foundation · Ge Aerospace Foundation · 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 Magnified Giving funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Magnified Giving. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 19 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 Magnified Giving’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