Skip to content
Mb Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Mb 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.

$113k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$72k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Animals$171kPhilanthropy$125kEducation$35kCommunity Improvement$35kEnvironment$12kPublic Benefit$10kReligion$10kHealth$9kOther$0
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k11 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $27k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $72k
$650
Median grant
3
States reached
$483k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH UNITED FUND$72,325
PAWS$27,198
ST CHYSOSTOM'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH$5,000
THE PHOENIX ZOO$2,500
TEMPLE SHOLOM OF CHICAGO$1,800
ISRAEL POLICY FORUM INC$1,000
FOREFRONT$650
FEEDING MATTERS$515
THE CHICAGO LIGHTHOUSE$500
MATAN INC$500
LAKE SHORE COUNTRY CLUB EDUCATION FUND$350
YMCA$150
CRADLES TO CRAYONS$104
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 (FY25–25, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, 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%MATAN INC: $500 → 17%CRADLES TO CRAYONS: $104 → 14%THE CHICAGO LIGHTHOUSE: $500 → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
MA
PA
CT
CA
AZ
AR
DC
LA
TX
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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$612k · 10 repeat orgs$77k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +44% since the first grant, against +17% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
20

Total granted

$612k
$68k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+44%
+17%

Still filing today

60%
65%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
EducationHealthPhilanthropyHuman ServicesInternationalAnimalsOther
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

  • PI
    PAWS INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $164k · revenue +386%
  • JU
    JEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO
    2× · 2017–2025 · $107k · revenue +13%
  • URBAN AFFAIRS COALITION
    3× · 2019–2021 · $35k · revenue +98%

Funded once

  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO INC
    one grant, 2020 · $17k · revenue -50%
  • GI
    GREENPEACE INC
    one grant, 2019 · $12k · revenue +5%
  • TG
    THE GEORGE AND BARBARA BUSH FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +44%
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
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
2
Chicago Public Education Fund

The chicago public education fund (the fund) is a nonprofit organization that improves public schools in chicago by investing in the talented educators who lead them.

Education
3
National Opinion Research Center

See schedule onorc at the university of chicago conducts research and data science on critical societal issues to guide decision-making and the development of programs and public policy. our experts identify relationships and trends, and…

Social Science
4
Furman University

The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.

Education
5
The Rand Corporation

Help improve policy and decision making through research and analysis.

Public Benefit
6
University Family Physicians Inc

Engage actively and continuously in medical research, education and training in the practice of medicine in conjunction with the department of family medicine of the indiana university school of medicine and indiana university…

—
7
Uchicago Medicine Network Inc

Uchicago medicine network, inc. supports and encourages health and human service by providing support, directly or indirectly to ingalls memorial hospital, the university of chicago medical center, and other related tax-exempt…

Health
8
Lake Forest Graduate School of Management

Lake Forest Graduate School of Management's mission is to bring the real world to business education and leadership development.

—
9
International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

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

International
10
Ucla Foundation

The ucla foundation is the giving, receiving, and investing arm of the ucla campus. the foundation enables private donors to help build, sustain and advance one of the world's finest academic and research institutions. private philanthropy…

Education
11
American Israel Public Affairs Committee

To strengthen and expand the u.s.-israel relationship in ways that enhance the security of the united states and israel.

International
12
Jewish Family and Children's Service of Minneapolis

Jewish family and children's service of minneapolis provides essential services to people of all ages and backgrounds to sustain healthy relationships, ease suffering and offer support in times of need.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Matan Inc; the most unlike its peers is Paws Inc. 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

25 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. 25 of the 39 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)
25/25
Grantees still filing
13/25
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JUF: $254,000 · OtherJUFURBAN AFFAIRS COALITION: $35,000 · OtherURBAN AFFAIRS COALITIONGREENPEACE INC: $12,000 · Other+20 more: $44,179 · Other+20 morePAWS INC: $164,447 · AnimalsPAWS INCJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $107,325 · PhilanthropyJEWISH UNITED FUND O…UNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO INC: $17,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF METROP…+2 more: $1,000 · PhilanthropyONEGOAL: $22,000 · Youth DevelopmentTHE GEORGE AND BARBARA BUSH FOUNDATION: $10,000 · EducationFrancis W Parker School: $6,000 · EducationErikson Institute: $1,000 · Education+1 more: $350 · EducationBREAKTHROUGH T1D: $6,720 · HealthFEEDING MATTERS INC: $515 · HealthCANCER WELLNESS CENTER: $500 · Health+1 more: $116 · HealthISRAEL POLICY FORUM INC: $6,000 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $1,000 · International
Other$345,179Animals$164,447Philanthropy$125,325Youth Development$22,000Education$17,350Health$7,851International$7,000

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 budgetPAWS INC: $164,447 over 8y, 18% of budgetJEWISH UNITED FUND OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO: $107,325 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetURBAN AFFAIRS COALITION: $35,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetONEGOAL: $22,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO INC: $17,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREENPEACE INC: $12,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH T1D: $6,720 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFrancis W Parker School: $6,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetISRAEL POLICY FORUM INC: $6,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFriends of Oscar Mayer School: $2,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetErikson Institute: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOREFRONT: $650 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLASAGNA LOVE INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CHICAGO LIGHTHOUSE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND OR VISUALLY IMPAIRED: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMATAN INC: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCANCER WELLNESS CENTER: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOutreach with Lacrosse Schools: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLAKE SHORE COUNTRY CLUB EDUCATION FUND: $350 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGOFUNDMEORG: $350 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAIDS Foundation of Chicago: $116 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCRADLES TO CRAYONS INC: $104 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…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC8.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Mb Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mb Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Cradles to Crayons Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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 Mb Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Mb 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 39 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 Mb’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