Skip to content
Matthew Daniel Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Matthew Daniel 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.

$134k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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.

Philanthropy$262kHealth$155kEducation$135kAnimals$74kInternational$62kReligion$60kYouth Development$21kEnvironment$20kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $2k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $132k
$12,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
The Entertainment Industry Foundation$35,000
The Road to Hope Inc$35,000
Cushman School Inc$20,000
Place of Possibility Inc$12,000
Allegheny Riverstone Center for the Arts$10,000
From Hearts 2 Hands Inc$10,000
Edward Charles Foundation$10,000
Cols Blues Alliance$2,000
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 (FY24–24, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Edward Charles Foundation: $10k → 14%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.
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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$553k · 8 repeat orgs$63k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +182% since the first grant, against +29% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
6

Total granted

$553k
$41k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+182%
+29%

Still filing today

50%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $22k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24
PhilanthropyHealthEducationYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureHuman 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

  • TR
    THE ROAD TO HOPE INC
    6× · 2017–2024 · $145k · revenue +182%
  • TC
    THE CUSHMAN SCHOOL INC
    6× · 2018–2024 · $130k · revenue +120%
  • PO
    PLACE OF POSSIBILITY
    6× · 2017–2024 · $57k · revenue +42% · 50% of their budget

Funded once

  • BA
    BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB ALONG THE ALLEGHENY
    one grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue -3%
  • OL
    Our Lady of Mr Carmel
    one grant, 2018 · $5k
  • CC
    CHILDREN'S CANCER RESEARCH FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue -76%
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
The Charles R Bronfman Prize Foundation
Philanthropy
2
The Ralph Lauren Corporate Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Curesearch for Children's Cancer

Curesearch's mission is to fund & support targeted & innovative cancer research with measurable results, & to be the authoritative source of information & resources for all those affected by children's cancer. see schedule o for…

Health
4
The Jcr Foundation
Philanthropy
5
Cern Foundation
—
6
The Goldman Sachs Foundation
Philanthropy
7
City of Hope

City of Hope's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION

Health
8
Cystic Fibrosis Foundation

To cure cf and provide all people with cf the opportunity to lead long, fulfilling lives by funding research and drug development, partnering with the cf community, and advancing high-quality, specialized care.

Health
9
The Cigna Group Foundation
Education
10
The Charles Foundation
Philanthropy
11
The Charles Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences Foundation
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Edward Charles Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Heal the Planet 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

14 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. 14 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
10/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY FOUNDATION: $150,000 · PhilanthropyENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY FOUNDATIONPLACE OF POSSIBILITY: $57,000 · PhilanthropyPLACE OF POSSIBILITYTHE MIAMI FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 · PhilanthropyTHE MIAMI FOUNDATION INCHEAL THE PLANET FOUNDATION: $20,000 · PhilanthropyHEAL THE PLANET FOUNDATION+1 more: $5,000 · PhilanthropyHuruma Rescue Mission Inc: $126,267 · OtherHuruma Rescue Mission IncBRANCHES INC: $35,000 · OtherBRANCHES INCOUR LADY OF MT CARMEL PARISH: $20,000 · OtherOUR LADY OF MT CARMEL PARISHFROM HEARTS 2 HANDS INC: $20,000 · OtherFROM HEARTS 2 HANDS INCCATHOLIC COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Other+2 more: $7,000 · OtherTHE ROAD TO HOPE INC: $145,000 · HealthTHE ROAD TO HOPE INCST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $5,000 · HealthTHE CUSHMAN SCHOOL INC: $130,000 · EducationTHE CUSHMAN SCHOOL …EDWINS LEADERSHIP & RESTAURANT INSTITUTE: $5,000 · EducationBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB ALONG THE ALLEGHENY: $20,000 · Youth Development+1 more: $500 · Youth DevelopmentALLEGHENY RIVERSTONE CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $10,000 · Arts & CultureEDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Human Services
Philanthropy$257,000Other$218,267Health$150,000Education$135,000Youth Development$20,500Arts & Culture$10,000Human Services$10,000

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 budgetENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY FOUNDATION: $150,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ROAD TO HOPE INC: $145,000 over 6y, 2.0% of budgetTHE CUSHMAN SCHOOL INC: $130,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetPLACE OF POSSIBILITY: $57,000 over 6y, 50% of budgetTHE MIAMI FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB ALONG THE ALLEGHENY: $20,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetHEAL THE PLANET FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 4y, 11% of budgetALLEGHENY RIVERSTONE CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $10,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetCATHOLIC COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S CANCER RESEARCH FUND: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEDWINS LEADERSHIP & RESTAURANT INSTITUTE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGirl Scouts of Southeast Florida Inc: $500 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.

The Bank of America C…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC6.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable 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 Matthew Daniel Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Matthew Daniel Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • The Cushman School Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Matthew Daniel Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Matthew Daniel Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Matthew Daniel’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