Skip to content
Margaret a Roberts Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Margaret a Roberts Charitable 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.

$8.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$6.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Philanthropy$11MInternational$1.7MEducation$615kReligion$575kHuman Services$381kHealth$340kCrime & Legal$320kYouth Development$150kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
  • $250k+2 grants · $8.5M
$2,588,754
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST MARGARET A ROBERTS CHAR FOUND FD$5,953,878
FIDELITY CHARITABLE THE HESSE GIVING FUND$2,588,754
CENTER FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE$75,000
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 (FY19–24, $333k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, 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%TACCC TORTURE ABOLITION AND SURVIVOR SUPPORT SERVICES: $30k → 14%TACCC TORTURE ABOLITION AND SURVIVOR SUPPORT SERVICES: $30k → 14%TORTURE ABOLITION AND SURVIVOR SUPPORT SERVICES: $30k → 14%FAITH BUILDERS: $1k → 16%FAITH BUILDERS: $1k → 16%TORTURE ABOLITION AND SURVIVOR SUPPORT SERVICES: $20k → 14%FAITH BUILDERS: $1k → 16%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $45k → 16%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $25k → 16%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $25k → 16%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $25k → 16%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $25k → 16%CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $25k → 16%PANDO INITIATIVE: $20k → 16%PANDO INITIATIVE: $20k → 16%PANDO INITIATIVE: $10k → 16%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

ME
MN
IL
WI
NY
MA
IA
OH
CT
CA
CO
MO
MD
KS
DC
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.

28%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.7M · 26 repeat orgs$9.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +37% since the first grant, against +23% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 25 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
32

Total granted

$3.7M
$698k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%
+23%

Still filing today

46%
22%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 1% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8.5M 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 ServicesInternationalYouth DevelopmentEducationCommunity ImprovementFood & NutritionOther
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

  • TC
    THE CENTER FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +61%
  • LL
    Life Learning Academy
    8× · 2017–2024 · $250k · revenue +37%
  • CC
    CATHOLIC CHARITIES INC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $170k · revenue +43%

Funded once

  • CF
    CENTER FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE LATIN AMERICA PROJECT
    one grant, 2024 · $250k
  • TJ
    THE JUNIOR LEAGUE OF WICHITA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +30%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $30k
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
World Vision Inc

World vision, inc. is a christian humanitarian organization dedicated to working with children, families, and their communities worldwide to reach their full potential by tackling the causes of poverty and injustice. (continued on schedule…

International
2
Foundation for the Homeless Inc

Empowering families and individuals experiencing homelessness to build a future filled with dignity, opportunity, and lasting solutions.

—
3
Youthbuild Global Inc

With love and respect, we partner with opportunity youth to build the skillsets and mindsets that lead to lifelong learning, livelihood, and leadership. youthbuild strives to create a world where all young people are seen for their…

Employment
4
Christel House International Inc

Chi prepares graduates of the christel house schools operated by its affiliated entities, which chi funds and oversees, to achieve upward economic mobility, demonstrate good citizenship, and become empowered to identify and realize their…

International
5
Wayside House Inc

Our mission is to break the cycle of addiction and trauma for women, children, and families.

—
6
Counterpart International Inc

For over 60 years, counterpart international has partnered with communities worldwide to turn local ideas into lasting solutions, connecting local vision with global opportunity. (continued on schedule o)we believe people closest to the…

International
7
Catholic Charities of Kansas City - St Joseph Inc

Helping people move to a better life through hope-filled care, services, and advocacy; calling all those of goodwill to join us

Human Services
8
Youth Homes

The mission of youth homes is to help every youth feel safe, have a sense of belonging, and find a place to call home.

Human Services
9
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
10
Devworks International

Devworks international is dedicated to a society where all people enjoy the freedom to pursue their own sustainable development. we contribute to this by strengthening the capacity of local organizations.

Human Services
11
Upwardly Global

Upwardly global removes employment barriers for immigrant, refugee, and asylee professionals while advancing the inclusion of their skills into the u.s. economy.

Employment
12
Global Ties Us

Global ties u.s. (global ties) powers individuals, communities, and nations to build trust and advance peace and prosperity through international exchange.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hope Haven Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Center for Victims of Torture. 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

20 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 20 of the 61 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)
20/20
Grantees still filing
13/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST MARGARET A ROBERTS CHAR FOUND FD: $5,953,878 · OtherMORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST MARGARET A ROBERTS CHAR FOUND FDFIDELITY CHARITABLE THE HESSE GIVING FUND: $2,588,754 · OtherFIDELITY CHARITABLE THE HESSE GIVING FUNDHOLY SAVIOR CATHOLIC CHURCH: $560,000 · Other+41 more: $1,710,000 · Other+41 moreTHE SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $2,615,842 · PhilanthropyTHE SAN FRANCISCO F…THE CENTER FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE: $1,180,000 · InternationalTHE CENTE…OXFAM-AMERICA INC: $140,000 · InternationalOXFAM-AME…+2 more: $15,000 · InternationalCATHOLIC CHARITIES INC: $170,000 · Human ServicesTORTURE ABOLITION AND SURVIVORS SUPPORT COALITION INTERNATIONAL: $110,000 · Human ServicesTHE PANDO INITIATIVE INC: $50,000 · Human Services+2 more: $11,410 · Human ServicesLife Learning Academy: $250,000 · EducationWIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC: $40,000 · EducationLIVE IN PEACE: $40,000 · Youth DevelopmentHOMEBOY INDUSTRIES: $20,000 · Youth DevelopmentRISE UP FOR YOUTH INC: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentTHE JUNIOR LEAGUE OF WICHITA INC: $50,000 · Community ImprovementKANSAS FOODBANK WAREHOUSE INC: $10,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$10,812,632Philanthropy$2,615,842International$1,335,000Human Services$341,410Education$290,000Youth Development$70,000Community Improvement$50,000Food & Nutrition$10,000

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 budgetTHE SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $2,615,842 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE: $1,180,000 over 9y, 0.7% of budgetLife Learning Academy: $250,000 over 8y, 1.3% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES INC: $170,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetOXFAM-AMERICA INC: $140,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetTORTURE ABOLITION AND SURVIVORS SUPPORT COALITION INTERNATIONAL: $110,000 over 4y, 3.2% of budgetTHE JUNIOR LEAGUE OF WICHITA INC: $50,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetTHE PANDO INITIATIVE INC: $50,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetWIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC: $40,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetLIVE IN PEACE: $40,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetYOUTH HORIZONS INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetHOMEBOY INDUSTRIES: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCASA INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetKANSAS FOODBANK WAREHOUSE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSave The Children Federation Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRISE UP FOR YOUTH INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetBETTER TOMORROW: $8,410 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetHOPE HAVEN CHARITABLE TRUST: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHOPE HAVEN INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAITHBUILDERS INC: $3,000 over 3y, 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 THE SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE CENTER FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE ↗
  • Who funds Life Learning Academy ↗
  • Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES INC ↗
  • Who funds OXFAM-AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds TORTURE ABOLITION AND SURVIVORS SUPPORT COALITION INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds THE JUNIOR LEAGUE OF WICHITA INC ↗
  • Who funds THE PANDO INITIATIVE INC ↗
  • Who funds WIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds LIVE IN PEACE ↗
  • Who funds YOUTH HORIZONS INC ↗
  • Who funds HOMEBOY INDUSTRIES ↗
  • Who funds CASA 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Berry Foundation IncWichita FoundationTextron Charitable Tr…Deboer Foundation IncUnited Way of the Pla…Servant FoundationVanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…Natl Christian Charit…American Online Givin…
Berry Foundation IncKS15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Berry Foundation Inc · Wichita Foundation · Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353 · Deboer Foundation Inc · United Way of the Plains Inc · Servant Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Margaret a Roberts Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Margaret a Roberts Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 8%
  • Save the Children Federation Inc: 30% of income from government
  • Casa Inc: 8% of income from government
  • Oxfam-America Inc: 0% of 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 61 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 Margaret a Roberts’ 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