Skip to content
Magnolia Star Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Magnolia Star 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.

$25k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$14k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Housing & Shelter$71kFood & Nutrition$57kReligion$49kHuman Services$48kHealth$32kPublic Safety & Disaster$31kInternational$17kEnvironment$14kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $14k
$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$8k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$13,500
THE SALVATION ARMY$5,000
Individual grant recipient$4,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD$2,300
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 (FY17–23, $19k) 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%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $2k → 14%AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS: $2k → 14%BATTERED WOMEN'S SHELTER: $5k → 13%BATTERED WOMEN'S SHELTER: $5k → 13%BATTERED WOMENS SHELTER: $2k → 13%BATTERED WOMEN'S SHELTER: $2k → 13%BATTERED WOMENS SHELTER: $2k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
OH
PA
CA
MO
VA
NM
AR
TN
NC
DC
GA
FL
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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$270k · 25 repeat orgs$83k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +41% since the first grant, against -17% for those funded once.

25 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 22 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
22

Total granted

$270k
$70k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
-17%

Still filing today

64%
27%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 46% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $14k 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
InternationalEnvironmentFood & NutritionHealthHuman ServicesReligionOther
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

  • GA
    GREATER ALBUQUERQUE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
    2× · 2022–2024 · $32k · revenue +22%
  • GN
    GOOD NEIGHBORS INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $19k · revenue +54%
  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER OHIO
    5× · 2017–2022 · $17k · revenue +41%

Funded once

  • IC
    INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS
    one grant, 2022 · $20k
  • GLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -40%
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL INC
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +12%
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
Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver Inc

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope.

—
2
Habitat for Humanity - Midohio

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity-midohio brings people together to inspire hope, build homes, empower families, and develop communities.

—
3
Habitat for Humanity Capital Region Inc

To improve our communities by providing and maintaining safe, healthy, affordable homeownership opportunities for low-to-moderate income community members, in partnership with volunteers and organizations throughout the community.

Housing & Shelter
4
Fort Collins Habitat for Humanity

Seeking to put god's love into action; habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities, and hope to realize our vision of a world where everyone has a decent place to live. fort collins habitat for humanity adheres…

Housing & Shelter
5
Greater Green Bay Habitat for Humanity

Habitat brings people together to build homes, communities and hope. the organization seeks out qualified applicants starting with a yearly application process for individuals and families to apply. the applicant must meet 3 basic…

—
6
Greater Florence Habitat for Humanity

Putting god's love into action, hfh brings people together to build homes, communities and hope by making decent, affordable housing available to more families. habitat seeks to eliminate poverty housing from the world and make decent…

—
7
Habitat for Humanity of Wake County Inc

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity of wake county brings people together to build homes, communities, and hope.

—
8
Habitat for Humanity for Ri South County Inc

To reduce substandard housing by creating simple decent affordable homes in partnership with people in need in order to improve quality of life and provide greater security.

—
9
Second Harvest North Central Food Bank

Engaging the community to end hunger

—
10
Habitat for Humanity of Kansas City

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope to realize our vision of a world where everyone has a decent place to live. habitat for humanity of kansas city…

Housing & Shelter
11
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
12
Central Pennsylvania Food Bank

Our mission is to solve hunger in central pennsylvania by ensuring that everyone struggling with hunger has access to enough wholesome food every day. we will achieve this bold goal with the help of our generous donors, volunteers and…

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Habitat for Humanity of Summit County Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Dance Fund. 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

26 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. 26 of the 49 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/26
Grantees still filing
17/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HAVEN OF REST MINISTRIES INCORPORATED: $38,600 · OtherHAVEN OF REST MINISTRIES INCORPORATEDTHE SALVATION ARMY: $27,100 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMYINTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS: $20,000 · OtherINTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSSGOOD NEIGHBORS INC: $18,700 · OtherGOOD NEIGHBORS INCHABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $13,500 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY INCPLANNED PARENTHOOD: $12,800 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOODHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF SUMMIT COUNTY INC: $11,500 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF SUMMIT COUNTY INCIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherAMERICAN RED CROSS NORTHERN OHIO: $7,000 · OtherBENNETT COLLEGE: $9,000 · Other+25 more: $38,900 · Other+25 moreAKRON-CANTON REGIONAL FOODBANK: $15,800 · Food & NutritionAKRON-CANTON…GREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC: $15,500 · Food & NutritionGREATER CLEV…GOOD SAMARITAN HUNGER CENTER: $6,500 · Food & NutritionGOOD SAMARIT…GREATER ALBUQUERQUE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $31,500 · Housing & ShelterGREATER AL…GLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · InternationalHABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL INC: $10,000 · InternationalINTERNATIONAL PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION WESTERN HEMISPHERE REGION: $6,400 · InternationalHOPE AND HEALING SURVIVOR RESOURCE CENTER: $15,300 · Human ServicesAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $4,000 · Human ServicesPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER OHIO: $17,000 · HealthPlanned Parenthood Great Rivers-Missouri: $1,500 · HealthWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $10,000 · EnvironmentSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $3,000 · EnvironmentTHE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $900 · Environment
Other$207,100Food & Nutrition$37,800Housing & Shelter$31,500International$26,400Human Services$19,300Health$18,500Environment$13,900

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 budgetGREATER ALBUQUERQUE HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $31,500 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetGOOD NEIGHBORS INC: $18,700 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER OHIO: $17,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAKRON-CANTON REGIONAL FOODBANK: $15,800 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC: $15,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHOPE AND HEALING SURVIVOR RESOURCE CENTER: $15,300 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF SUMMIT COUNTY INC: $11,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetWESTERN RESERVE LAND CONSERVANCY: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBENNETT COLLEGE: $9,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetGOOD SAMARITAN HUNGER CENTER: $6,500 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetINTERNATIONAL PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION WESTERN HEMISPHERE REGION: $6,400 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWESTERN RESERVE HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTruly Reaching You Inc: $4,100 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGENNESARET INC: $3,500 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIN TOUCH MINISTRIES INC: $1,600 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPlanned Parenthood Great Rivers-Missouri: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNETWORK FOR GOOD: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetACCESS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE OHIO ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $900 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetURBAN VISION: $800 over 2y, 0.1% 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.

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.

Akron Community Found…W Paul Mills & Thora …Mary S & David C Corb…Charles E and Mabel M…Northern Ohio Golf Ch…United Way of Summit …Maynard Family Founda…Glenn R & Alice V Bog…Lehner Family Foundat…Lloyd L & Louise K Sm…L R Moffitt & L W Mof…Sisler McFawn Foundat…
Akron Community FoundationOH21.5× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Akron Community Foundation · W Paul Mills & Thora J Mills Memorial · Mary S & David C Corbin Foundation · Charles E and Mabel M Ritchie Memorial · Northern Ohio Golf Charities Foundation Inc · United Way of Summit and Medina · Maynard Family Foundation · Glenn R & Alice V Boggess Memorial · Lehner Family Foundation · Lloyd L & Louise K Smith Foundation · L R Moffitt & L W Moffitt Foundation · Sisler McFawn Foundation Pfdn

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 Magnolia Star Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Magnolia Star Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%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 · 0–75%
    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 49 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 Magnolia Star’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