Skip to content

· Private foundation

Mary Ellen Bell Charitable Tuw

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.

$70k
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
8
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Animals$164kEducation$68kHuman Services$46kReligion$46kHealth$42kEnvironment$23kMembership Benefit$23k
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$3,906
Median grant
8
States reached
$971k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LEE'S JUNIOR COLLEGE$3,906
WESTMINSTER COLLEGE$3,906
DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE$3,906
CASA MATERNA SOCIETY$3,906
GENEVA COLLEGE$3,906
ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE$3,906
ST ANDREWS UNITED PRESBYTERIAN$3,906
DOGS FOR THE DEAF$3,906
AMERICAN WALDENSIAN AID SOCIETY$3,906
BUCKHORN CHILDREN'S CENTER$3,906
MASSACHUSETTS SPCA$3,906
NEW ALEXANDRIA UNION CEMETERY$3,906
INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL$3,906
SOUTHERN OREGON HUMANE SOCIETY$3,906
AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR PREVENTION$3,906
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 (FY23–25, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CASA MATERNA SOCIETY: $5k → 6%CASA MATERNA SOCIETY: $4k → 6%CASA MATERNA SOCIETY: $3k → 6%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

NY
MA
OR
PA
CA
KY
NC
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$411k · 20 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

20 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
0

Total granted

$411k
$0

Still filing today

55%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEducationEnvironmentHuman ServicesOther
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

  • GC
    GENEVA COLLEGE
    6× · 2020–2025 · $23k · revenue +3%
  • AW
    AMERICAN WALDENSIAN SOCIETY
    6× · 2020–2025 · $23k · revenue +50%
  • DO
    Defenders of Wildlife
    6× · 2020–2025 · $23k · revenue +41%

Funded once

    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
    Washington Humane Society

    The washington humane society protects animals, supports families, and advocates for positive change to create a world where all animals can thrive. we enrich the humanity of our communities by promoting compassion and encouraging people…

    Animals
    2
    Progressive Animal Welfare Society aka Paws

    A champion for animals since 1967, PAWS is a nationally recognized leader - rehabilitating injured and orphaned wildlife, sheltering and adopting homeless cats and dogs, and educating people to make a better world for animals and people.

    Animals
    3
    Animal Outlook Inc

    Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.

    Animals
    4
    Marin Humane Society

    Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.

    Animals
    5
    Women's Humane Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Inc

    As america's first animal shelter, founded in 1869, women's humane society dba women's animal center (wac), assists people in the community, saves the lives of animals, and improves the health of pets through its shelter and adoptions…

    Animals
    6
    Wildearth Guardians

    Wildearth guardians works to protect and restore the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the american west.

    Unclassified
    7
    Danbury Animal Welfare Society

    Danbury animal welfare society , inc.(daws) is a non-profit organization dedicated to improving the lives of animals in our community and beyond. we promote responsible pet guardianship and the humane treatment of animals, and work toward…

    Animals
    8
    United Animal Nations Dba Redrover

    To bring animals out of crisis and strengthen the bond between people and animals through emergency sheltering, disaster relief services, financial assistance and education. redrover accomplishes its mission by engaging volunteers and…

    —
    9
    International Fund for Animal Welfare Inc

    IFAWs strategy focuses on improving the welfare of individual animals and the conservation status of wildlife populations in priority habitats through on-the-ground efforts community engagement and global advocacy. Our dual emphasis on…

    Animals
    10
    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
    11
    Animal Care Sanctuary

    Animal care sanctuary's lifesaving mission as a no kill organization envisions a community that promotes turning compassion into action for companion animals by: 1.) adopting healthy pet companions into loving homes. 2.) promoting the…

    Animals
    12
    Rainforest Trust

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

    International
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is In Defense of Animals; the most unlike its peers is Casa Materna Society Inc Dba Italian Children's Mission. 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

    11 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. 11 of the 20 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)
    2
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    11/11
    Grantees still filing
    9/11
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL: $22,891 · OtherINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMALAMERICAN WALDENSIAN SOCIETY: $22,891 · OtherAMERICAN WALDENSIAN SOCIETYAMERICAN FONDOUK HOSPITAL: $22,891 · OtherAMERICAN FONDOUK HOSPITALNEW ALEXANDRIA UNION CEMETERY: $22,891 · OtherNEW ALEXANDRIA UNION CEMETERYST ANDREWS UNITED PRESBYTERIAN: $22,891 · OtherST ANDREWS UNITED PRESBYTERIANBUCKHORN CHILDREN'S CENTER: $22,891 · OtherBUCKHORN CHILDREN'S CENTERLEE'S JUNIOR COLLEGE: $22,276 · OtherLEE'S JUNIOR COLLEGEAMERICAN SOCIETY FOR PREVENTION: $19,538 · OtherAMERICAN SOCIETY FOR PREVENTIONSOCIETY FOR ANIMAL PROTECTIVE: $15,632 · OtherSOCIETY FOR ANIMAL PROTECTIVECASA MATERNA SOCIETY: $10,144 · OtherDefenders of Wildlife: $22,891 · AnimalsDefenders of WildlifeIN DEFENSE OF ANIMALS: $22,891 · AnimalsIN DEFENSE OF ANIMALSMASSACHUSETTS SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $22,891 · AnimalsMASSACHUSETTS SOCIETY FOR THE PREV…DOGS FOR THE DEAF INC DBA DOGS FOR BETTER LIVES: $22,891 · AnimalsDOGS FOR THE DEAF INC DBA DOGS FOR…SOUTHERN OREGON HUMANE SOCIETY: $22,891 · AnimalsSOUTHERN OREGON HUMANE SOCIETYANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $10,613 · AnimalsANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTEGENEVA COLLEGE: $22,891 · EducationGENEVA COLLE…WESTMINSTER COLLEGE: $22,891 · EducationWESTMINSTER …GREENPEACE FUND INC: $22,891 · EnvironmentCASA MATERNA SOCIETY INC DBA ITALIAN CHILDREN'S MISSION: $12,747 · Human Services
    Other$204,936Animals$125,068Education$45,782Environment$22,891Human Services$12,747

    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 budgetGENEVA COLLEGE: $22,891 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN WALDENSIAN SOCIETY: $22,891 over 6y, 2.5% of budgetDefenders of Wildlife: $22,891 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetIN DEFENSE OF ANIMALS: $22,891 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetGREENPEACE FUND INC: $22,891 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $22,891 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetWESTMINSTER COLLEGE: $22,891 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetDOGS FOR THE DEAF INC DBA DOGS FOR BETTER LIVES: $22,891 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetSOUTHERN OREGON HUMANE SOCIETY: $22,891 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetCASA MATERNA SOCIETY INC DBA ITALIAN CHILDREN'S MISSION: $12,747 over 3y, 43% of budgetANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $10,613 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.

    • Who funds GENEVA COLLEGE ↗
    • Who funds AMERICAN WALDENSIAN SOCIETY ↗
    • Who funds Defenders of Wildlife ↗
    • Who funds IN DEFENSE OF ANIMALS ↗
    • Who funds GREENPEACE FUND INC ↗
    • Who funds MASSACHUSETTS SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗
    • Who funds WESTMINSTER COLLEGE ↗
    • Who funds DOGS FOR THE DEAF INC DBA DOGS FOR BETTER LIVES ↗
    • Who funds SOUTHERN OREGON HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
    • Who funds CASA MATERNA SOCIETY INC DBA ITALIAN CHILDREN'S MISSION ↗
    • Who funds ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE ↗

    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.

    Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA9.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Mary Ellen Bell Charitable Tuw funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mary Ellen Bell Charitable Tuw. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 30%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      3get no government money at all
      2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
      0rely on government for over half their income
      ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
      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 20 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 Mary Ellen Bell Charitable Tuw’s filings →

      More from the funding graph