Skip to content
Mark and Mary Ellen Stinski Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Mark and Mary Ellen Stinski Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$94k
Granted FY2021
13
Grants FY2021
11
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Mark and Mary Ellen Stinski Foundation’s FY2023 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2023 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2021, the last year Mark and Mary Ellen Stinski Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 7 organizations, $94k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

39
’17
38
’18
6
’19
8
’20
7
’21
1
’22
0
’23

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0185% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Philanthropy$797kInternational$224kHealth$83kEducation$75kEnvironment$44kCivil Rights$24kHousing & Shelter$20kCommunity Improvement$15kOther$0
02FY2021 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k9 grants · $29k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $65k
$5,000
Median grant
11
States reached
$19k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$20,000
PARTNERS IN HEALTH$20,000
CONNECT BEND$15,000
RED CLOUD INDIAN SCHOOL$10,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY$5,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND$5,000
THE LAND INSTITUTE$5,000
OSTPH INCORPORATED$5,000
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER$1,000
RIVER RD AFRICAN AMERICAN MUSEUM$1,000
PUBLIC CITIZEN$1,000
YUMA JAPANESE GARDENS$1,000
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 (FY17–18, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CHALLENGED ATHLETES FOUNDATION: $1k → 11%CHALLENGED ATHLETES FOUNDATION: $1k → 11%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

WA
MT
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
SD
IA
OH
PA
CA
VA
MD
AZ
KS
NC
DC
LA
AL
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$663k · 60 repeat orgs$63k to everyone else

60 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2021, 49 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call). Read against FY2021, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

60
16

Total granted

$663k
$43k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+38%
+67%

Still filing today

50%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
InternationalHealthEnvironmentArts & CultureFood & NutritionEducationOther
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

  • PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
    4× · 2017–2021 · $120k · revenue +120%
  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $75k · revenue +98%
  • PC
    PUBLIC CITIZEN INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $17k · revenue +167%

Funded once

  • TL
    THE LAKOTA FUND INCORPORATEDgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $15k · revenue +605%
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • NC
    NEWMAN CATHOLIC STUDENT CENTER OF IOWA CITY IOWA
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
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
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
2
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.

Crime & Legal
3
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
4
Rainforest Alliance Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

—
5
International Development Enterprises

See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.

International
6
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International
7
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
8
Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.

Food & Nutrition
9
Central Indiana Corporate Partnership Inc

Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…

Community Improvement
10
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
11
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
12
Center for International Environmental Law Inc

To investigate, research, write, publish, present conferences and teach with respect to global, regional, transboundary, and comparative environmental issues and to make the findings from such activities available to the general public; to…

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Amnesty International of the Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is Soar. 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

42 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. 42 of the 79 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
41/42
Grantees still filing
36/42
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $795,415 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND+1 more: $15,000 · Community ImprovementIndividual grant recipient: $130,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientOSTPH INCORPORATED: $80,000 · OtherOSTPH INCORPORATEDRED CLOUD INDIAN SCHOOL: $65,000 · OtherRED CLOUD INDIAN SCHOOLIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCONNECT BEND: $15,000 · Other+51 more: $128,900 · Other+51 morePARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $120,000 · HealthPARTNERS …+3 more: $3,500 · HealthMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $75,100 · InternationalInternational Rescue Committee INC: $8,000 · InternationalTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $4,000 · International+7 more: $12,250 · InternationalPUBLIC CITIZEN INC: $17,000 · Public BenefitENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $10,500 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $3,000 · EnvironmentIOWA NATURAL HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $2,000 · Environment+1 more: $500 · EnvironmentCommunity Food Bank Inc: $10,000 · Food & NutritionIOWA ORGANIC ASSOCIATION: $1,000 · Food & Nutrition
Community Improvement$810,415Other$443,900Health$123,500International$99,350Public Benefit$17,000Environment$16,000Food & Nutrition$11,000

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 budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $795,415 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $120,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $75,100 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPUBLIC CITIZEN INC: $17,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTHE LAKOTA FUND INCORPORATED: $15,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $10,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCommunity Food Bank Inc: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $8,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetThe Land Institute: $7,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $7,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHabitat for Humanity Tucson Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetELDER SERVICES INC: $2,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetOXFAM-AMERICA INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetIOWA NATURAL HERITAGE FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBUR OAK LAND TRUST: $2,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetUNITED WAY OF EAST CENTRAL IOWA: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetST NORBERT COLLEGE INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHALLENGED ATHLETES INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSEARCH FOR COMMON GROUND: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFINCA INTERNATIONAL INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT HOPE - THE PEOPLE-TO-PEOPLE HEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $1,250 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetIOWA ORGANIC ASSOCIATION: $1,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetOGLALA LAKOTA COLLEGE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGUEST HOUSE INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD BICYCLE RELIEF NFP: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetIOWA BICYCLE COALITION INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetVOICE OF THE FAITHFUL INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetARIZONA OPERA COMPANY: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetECOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGoodwill Industries of Southern AZ Inc: $100 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.

  • Who funds FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
  • Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds PUBLIC CITIZEN INC ↗
  • Who funds THE LAKOTA FUND INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds Community Food Bank Inc ↗
  • Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
  • Who funds The Land Institute ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds Habitat for Humanity Tucson Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE CARTER CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds ELDER SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds OXFAM-AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds IOWA NATURAL HERITAGE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BUR OAK LAND TRUST ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY OF EAST CENTRAL IOWA ↗
  • Who funds ST NORBERT COLLEGE 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.

Community Foundation …Community Foundation …American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…The Bank of America C…National Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
Community Foundation of Johnson CountyIA13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Johnson County · Community Foundation for Southern Arizona · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Mark and Mary Ellen Stinski Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mark and Mary Ellen Stinski Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation: 0% of income from government
  • Oxfam-America Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
11report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 79 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2021, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Mark and Mary Ellen Stinski’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