Skip to content
Material Handling Industry at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Material Handling Industry

To deliver member value every day.

$397k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$250k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$839kPublic Safety & Disaster$240kScience & Tech$168kHuman Services$52kInternational$30kFood & Nutrition$21kYouth Development$18k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $382,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $396,680 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $14,180 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $83k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
  • $250k+1 grant · $250k
$25,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$101M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MATERIAL HANDLING EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC$250,000
ANONYMOUS PHILANTHROPY LLC$50,000
FIRST NORTH CAROLINA$25,000
MIAMI UNIVERSITY$25,000
AMERICAN LOGISTICS AID NETWORK$22,500
PBS IMPACT FOUNDATION INC$10,000
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 (FY19–20, $32k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, 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%YMCA OF GREATER CHARLOTTE: $26k → 10%SAFEALLIANCE: $5k → 10%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
PA
WV
VA
TN
NC
SC
DC
AL
TX
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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 5 repeat orgs$522k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
17

Total granted

$1.2M
$412k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+83%

Still filing today

100%
76%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $110k 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
EducationPublic Safety & DisasterFood & NutritionPhilanthropyHuman ServicesYouth 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

  • MH
    MATERIAL HANDLING EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $932k · revenue +124% · 45% of their budget
  • AL
    AMERICAN LOGISTICS AID NETWORK
    4× · 2020–2025 · $263k · revenue +356%
  • SH
    Second Harvest Food Bank of Metrolina Inc
    2× · 2020–2022 · $11k · revenue +29%

Funded once

  • VP
    VIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE & STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2018 · $90k
  • TU
    THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $55k · revenue +99%
  • CU
    CLEMSON UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2018 · $50k
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
University Foundation
—
2
North State Foundation
Philanthropy
3
The Foundation for Nc a&T State University

The mission of the Foundation is to cultivate loyalty and tradition, and foster mutually beneficial lifelong relationships between the University, alumni, students and friends of the Aggie Family

—
4
Lsu Research Foundation
Community Improvement
5
Nc Farm Bureau Legal Foundation Inc
—
6
Unfi Foundation
Philanthropy
7
Duke Energy Foundation
—
8
Uta Foundation
Philanthropy
9
The Carolina Trust
Philanthropy
10
Foundation for Technology News and Public Affairs Inc
Philanthropy
11
Georgia State University Research Foundation Inc

The corporation has been organized to engage in activities and pursuits which contribute to the educational, research, and service functions of georgia state university. thus, the corporation will attempt to secure gifts, contributions,…

Education
12
Tennessee State University Foundation

To promote and support literacy, scientific, educational,scholarship,research, and developmental goals at tennessee state university.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Foundation of the State University of New York At Binghamton Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Anonymous Foundation. 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

21 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. 21 of the 26 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
17/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MATERIAL HANDLING EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC: $931,550 · OtherMATERIAL HANDLING EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INCVIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE & STATE UNIVERSITY: $90,000 · OtherVIRGINIA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE & STATE UNIVERSITYCLEMSON UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · Other+6 more: $88,050 · Other+6 moreAMERICAN LOGISTICS AID NETWORK: $262,500 · Public Safety & DisasterAMERICAN LOGISTIC…INDUSTRIAL TRUCK STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · Public Safety & DisasterTHE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE FOUNDATION INC: $55,000 · EducationTHE UNIVER…TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $25,000 · EducationTEXAS STAT…AUBURN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $22,500 · EducationAUBURN UNI…The Penn State Research Foundation: $22,500 · EducationThe Penn S…FOUNDATION OF THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BINGHAMTON INC: $17,500 · EducationFOUNDATION…QUEEN CITY ROBOTICS ALLIANCE INC: $11,900 · EducationQUEEN CITY…+1 more: $5,000 · EducationANONYMOUS PHILANTHROPY LLC: $50,000 · PhilanthropyHOPE MATCH: $10,000 · PhilanthropyYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER CHARLOTTE: $26,350 · Human ServicesSafe Alliance Inc: $5,200 · Human ServicesFIRST NORTH CAROLINA: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentSecond Harvest Food Bank of Metrolina Inc: $11,000 · Food & NutritionFeeding America: $10,000 · Food & NutritionWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $20,000 · International
Other$1,159,600Public Safety & Disaster$272,500Education$159,400Philanthropy$60,000Human Services$31,550Youth Development$25,000Food & Nutrition$21,000International$20,000

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 budgetMATERIAL HANDLING EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC: $931,550 over 9y, 45% of budgetAMERICAN LOGISTICS AID NETWORK: $262,500 over 4y, 19% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE FOUNDATION INC: $55,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER CHARLOTTE: $26,350 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRock Hill School District Foundation Inc: $25,450 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetTEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetFIRST NORTH CAROLINA: $25,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetAUBURN UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $22,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION OF THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BINGHAMTON INC: $17,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetQUEEN CITY ROBOTICS ALLIANCE INC: $11,900 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetSecond Harvest Food Bank of Metrolina Inc: $11,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetINDUSTRIAL TRUCK STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetFeeding America: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSafe Alliance Inc: $5,200 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHOMPSON CHILD & FAMILY FOCUS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNC STATE ENGINEERING FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 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.

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.

Duke Energy FoundationUnited Way WorldwideVerizon FoundationThe Blackbaud Giving …The Pfizer Foundation…The Bank of America C…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Duke Energy FoundationNC15.4× affinity6 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Duke Energy Foundation · United Way Worldwide · Verizon Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Material Handling Industry funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Material Handling Industry. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 26 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 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 Material Handling Industry’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