Skip to content
Makers Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Makers Foundation Inc

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.

$26k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$6k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0159% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Community Improvement$52kScience & Tech$20kArts & Culture$15kPhilanthropy$7kHealth$7kReligion$5kRecreation & Sports$3kPublic Safety & Disaster$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$5,943
DUBOIS COUNTY 4-H COUNCIL$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
Individual grant recipient$3,997
Individual grant recipient$750
SPECIAL OLYMPICS DUBOIS COUNTY$500
DUBOIS COUNTY MUSEUM$250
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 75% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%OTHER DONATIONS: $10k → 11%ARTESIAN MOTORWORKS CLUB: $1k → 8%JEREMY SWENSON RACING: $5k → 11%EMILY WHITEHEAD FOUNDATION: $7k → 16%TREASURE INVESTMENT CORPORATION: $50k → 8%FM3 PERFORMANCE MARKETING: $5k → 9%LOGAN RHYCE COZZIE: $5k → 12%REED WHITNEY RACING: $5k → 8%TOM AND DEB FARRINGTON: $5k → 9%SANTA CLAUSE POLICE DEPARTMENT: $300 → 9%OAKLAND CITY UNIVERSITY ATHLETIC CAMPAIGN: $1k → 10%REBECCA VOELKEL: $5k → 11%BROTHERHOOD CHARITIES: $3k → 11%ELMER BUCHTA TECH CENTER: $10k → 12%VUJ FOUNDATION: $1k → 15%BIG MIKES BENEVOLENT FOUNDATION: $1k → 16%DANNY POPP: $2k → 16%JAMES GARFIELD: $3k → 20%KYLE COCHRAN: $3k → 18%KEITH WINN: $5k → 11%JEREMY SWENSON RACING: $4k → 11%FM3 PERFORMANCE MARKETING: $3k → 9%LOGAN RHYCE COZZIE: $5k → 12%REED WHITNEY RACING: $5k → 8%TDS KREATIONS: $5k → 9%BROTHERHOOD CHARITIES: $3k → 11%ETHAN SCHEPERS: $5k → 12%BIG MIKES BENEVOLENT FOUNDATION: $1k → 16%DAVE & DIANE SCHNELL: $5k → 11%FM3 PERFORMANCE MARKETING: $1k → 9%REED WHITNEY RACING: $3k → 8%BROTHERHOOD CHARITIES-CENTURY CHEVY: $500 → 11%ELMER BUCHTA TECH CENTER: $10k → 12%JOHN MERDER: $4k → 11%FM3 PERFORMANCE MARKETING: $1k → 9%DUBOIS COUNTY MUSEUM: $2k → 8%ETHAN SCHEPERS: $4k → 12%OTHER DONATIONS: $750 → 11%FM3 PERFORMANCE MARKETING: $700 → 9%SPECIAL OLYMPICS DUBOIS COUNTY: $1k → 8%DAWN SMITH: $10k → 11%SPECIAL OLYMPICS DUBOIS COUNTY: $1k → 8%BARRETT JACKSON: $6k → 11%JASPER HIGH SCHOOL MOTORSPORTS CLUB: $750 → 8%SPECIAL OLYMPICS DUBOIS COUNTY: $500 → 8%ALEX ENGLERT: $500 → 8%PATOKA VALLEY QUILTERS CLUB: $500 → 8%SOUTHRIDGE HIGH SCHOOL: $750 → 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
MA
OR
IN
OH
PA
KY
AZ
TN
NC
LA
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.

48%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$111k · 13 repeat orgs$121k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
21

Total granted

$111k
$96k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-16%
+53%

Still filing today

8%
14%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 6% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureHealthYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • EB
    ELMER BUCHTA TECH CENTER
    2× · 2020–2021 · $20k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    3× · 2022–2024 · $13k
  • FP
    FM3 PERFORMANCE MARKETING
    5× · 2020–2024 · $11k

Funded once

  • TI
    TREASURE INVESTMENT CORPORATION
    one grant, 2021 · $50k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
  • EW
    EMILY WHITEHEAD FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $7k · revenue +53%
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

5 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. 5 of the 39 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)
5/5
Grantees still filing
2/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TREASURE INVESTMENT CORPORATION: $50,000 · OtherTREASURE INVESTMENT CORPORATIONELMER BUCHTA TECH CENTER: $20,000 · OtherELMER BUCHTA TECH CENTERIndividual grant recipient: $12,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientFM3 PERFORMANCE MARKETING: $11,067 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $9,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $8,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $7,500 · Other+24 more: $58,190 · Other+24 moreEMILY WHITEHEAD FOUNDATION: $6,500 · HealthDUBOIS COUNTY 4-H COUNCIL INC: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentDubois County Museum Inc: $2,250 · Arts & CultureST PATRICK'S CELEBRATION INC: $500 · Arts & Culture
Other$217,757Health$6,500Youth Development$5,000Arts & Culture$2,750

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

25%50%75%100%$100kgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEMILY WHITEHEAD FOUNDATION: $6,500 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetDUBOIS COUNTY 4-H COUNCIL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetDubois County Museum Inc: $2,250 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetIRELAND LIONS CLUB: $300 over 1y, 1.1% 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 EMILY WHITEHEAD FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds DUBOIS COUNTY 4-H COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds Dubois County Museum Inc ↗
  • Who funds ST PATRICK'S CELEBRATION INC ↗
  • Who funds IRELAND LIONS CLUB ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Makers Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Makers Foundation Inc. 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    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 39 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 Makers’ 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