Skip to content
McKee Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

McKee Foundation Inc

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.

$7k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
9
States reached
$750
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Philanthropy$9kArts & Culture$8kAnimals$6kFood & Nutrition$6kReligion$6kInternational$5kHealth$5kEducation$4kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$500
Median grant
9
States reached
$141k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EANES EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION$750
Individual grant recipient$750
DING DARLING WILDLIFE FOUNDATION$750
DIRECT RELIEF$750
WOODSTOCK FOUNDATION$750
TRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCH$500
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FED OF AMERICA$500
PRO PUBLICA$500
SECOND HELPINGS INC$375
ROBIN'S NEST$375
JENKINS FOREVER FARM$250
COTTONWOOD GULCH FOUNDATION$250
HENDRICKS COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATI$250
WCRB$125
AMHERST CINEMA$125
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 74% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%DIRECT RELIEF: $750 → 14%RACE FORWARD: $750 → 17%EANES EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $750 → 10%COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $500 → 14%DING DARLING WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $750 → 11%WOODSTOCK FOUNDATION: $1k → 6%NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND: $1k → 12%CENTRAL INDIANA LAND TRUST: $1k → 16%ACLU OHIO: $750 → 15%AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $1k → 14%DIRECT RELIEF: $750 → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD FED OF AMERICA: $500 → 17%EANES EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $750 → 10%COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $500 → 14%DING DARLING WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $750 → 11%WOODSTOCK FOUNDATION: $750 → 6%NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND: $750 → 12%SECOND HELPINGS INC: $750 → 16%ACLU OHIO: $750 → 15%DIRECT RELIEF: $750 → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD FED OF AMERICA: $500 → 17%EANES EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $750 → 10%DING DARLING WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $750 → 11%WOODSTOCK FOUNDATION: $750 → 6%SECOND HELPINGS INC: $750 → 16%ACLU OHIO: $750 → 15%DIRECT RELIEF: $750 → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD FED OF AMERICA: $500 → 17%EANES EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $750 → 10%DING DARLING WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $500 → 11%WOODSTOCK FOUNDATION: $750 → 6%EANES EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION: $750 → 10%WOODSTOCK FOUNDATION: $750 → 6%SPARK: $750 → 14%WOODSTOCK FOUNDATION: $750 → 6%SPARK: $600 → 14%WOODSTOCK FOUNDATION: $750 → 6%WOODSTOCK FOUNDATION: $750 → 6%PRO PUBLICA: $750 → 17%TRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $750 → 16%PRO PUBLICA: $750 → 17%TRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $750 → 16%PRO PUBLICA: $750 → 17%TRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $750 → 16%TRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $750 → 16%UNDOCO FUND: $750 → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $750 → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $750 → 17%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
MI
NY
MA
IN
OH
PA
CA
CO
VA
NM
DC
GA
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$57k · 24 repeat orgs$4k to everyone else

24 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

24
7

Total granted

$57k
$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
+18%

Still filing today

50%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
EducationEnvironmentArts & CultureCivil RightsHealthFood & NutritionOther
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

  • PRO PUBLICA INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $5k · revenue +48%
  • PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $5k · revenue +12%
  • DIRECT RELIEF
    4× · 2022–2025 · $3k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • CI
    CENTRAL INDIANA LAND TRUST INCORPORATEDgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue +349%
  • UF
    UNDOCO FUND
    one grant, 2017 · $750
  • RACE FORWARD
    one grant, 2022 · $750 · revenue +25%
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
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
2
Rainforest Trust

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

International
3
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
4
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…

Environment
5
Conservation International Foundation

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

Environment
6
Washington Forest Law Center

Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.

—
7
Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation

This member-supported organization protects and restores iowa's land, water and wildlife for future generations. priorities include permanent land protection, promotion of improved land management and bringing new conservation…

Environment
8
Property and Environment Research Center

Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.

Public Benefit
9
Natural Resource Governance Institute

Nrgi envisions a world where natural resources enable fair, prosperous and sustainable societies, instead of undermining them. nrgi exists because decisions about how natural resources are governed determine the well-being of people in…

International
10
Third Way

To research and develop centrist policy ideas.

Civil Rights
11
Native Plant Trust Inc

The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.

Environment
12
Natural Resources Foundation of

To protect wisconsin's lands, waters, and wildlife by providing funding, leading partnerships, and connecting all people with nature.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated; the most unlike its peers is Twin Cities Parent Education Group. 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

20 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. 20 of the 33 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)
19/20
Grantees still filing
14/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WOODSTOCK FOUNDATION INC: $6,750 · OtherWOODSTOCK FOUNDATION INCTRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $5,500 · OtherTRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCHDING DARLING WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $3,500 · OtherDING DARLING WILDLIFE FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient: $2,250 · OtherIndividual grant recipientRE TAILS INC: $1,875 · OtherJENKINS FOREVER FARM INC: $1,750 · OtherAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $1,750 · OtherSPARK PROGRAM INC: $1,350 · OtherHENDRICKS COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $2,550 · OtherHENDRICKS COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INCNATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC: $1,750 · Other+12 more: $6,600 · Other+12 moreEanes Education Foundation: $3,750 · EducationEanes Educa…COTTONWOOD GULCH EXPEDITIONS: $2,500 · EducationCOTTONWOOD …+1 more: $150 · EducationPRO PUBLICA INC: $5,250 · Arts & CulturePRO PUBLICA…AMHERST CINEMA ARTS CENTER INC: $1,125 · Arts & CultureAMHERST CIN…PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $4,500 · HealthSECOND HELPINGS INC: $4,125 · Food & NutritionDIRECT RELIEF: $3,000 · InternationalENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,500 · EnvironmentCENTRAL INDIANA LAND TRUST INCORPORATED: $1,000 · EnvironmentSLIDE RANCH: $350 · Environment
Other$35,625Education$6,400Arts & Culture$6,375Health$4,500Food & Nutrition$4,125International$3,000Environment$2,850

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10k$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWOODSTOCK FOUNDATION INC: $6,750 over 9y, 75% of budgetPRO PUBLICA INC: $5,250 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $4,500 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetSECOND HELPINGS INC: $4,125 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetEanes Education Foundation: $3,750 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetDIRECT RELIEF: $3,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHENDRICKS COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $2,550 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetCOTTONWOOD GULCH EXPEDITIONS: $2,500 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetNATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC: $1,750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSPARK PROGRAM INC: $1,350 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMHERST CINEMA ARTS CENTER INC: $1,125 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetCENTRAL INDIANA LAND TRUST INCORPORATED: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetRACE FORWARD: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDING DARLING WILDLIFE SOCIETY INC: $750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER: $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSLIDE RANCH: $350 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTWIN CITIES PARENT EDUCATION GROUP: $150 over 1y, 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 WOODSTOCK FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds PRO PUBLICA INC ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds SECOND HELPINGS INC ↗
  • Who funds Eanes Education Foundation ↗
  • Who funds DIRECT RELIEF ↗
  • Who funds HENDRICKS COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds COTTONWOOD GULCH EXPEDITIONS ↗
  • Who funds NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds SPARK PROGRAM INC ↗
  • Who funds AMHERST CINEMA ARTS CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds CENTRAL INDIANA LAND TRUST INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds RACE FORWARD ↗
  • Who funds DING DARLING WILDLIFE SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER ↗
  • Who funds SLIDE RANCH ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds TWIN CITIES PARENT EDUCATION GROUP ↗

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.

Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…National Philanthropi…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN9.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable 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 McKee Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from McKee Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Amherst Cinema Arts Center Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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 33 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 McKee’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