Skip to content
Meisenheimer Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Meisenheimer Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$36k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
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.

Education$122kHealth$31kPhilanthropy$14kHuman Services$13kCommunity Improvement$9kHousing & Shelter$9kArts & Culture$7kPublic Safety & Disaster$2kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
$2,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$116k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NOTRE DAME HIGH SCHOOL$25,000
NICOLE DONZELLO FOUNDATION INC$4,142
BRIDGPORT HOSPITAL FOUNDATION$2,500
TURKEY HILL SCHOOL PTO$2,000
UNITED WAY$1,500
PB & J FUND$250
BRIDGES HEALTHCARE INC$250
ORANGE HISTORICAL SOCIETY$200
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 (FY18–18, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 5%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 5%BOARD CERTIFIED BEHAVIOR ANALYST - WALK WITH FRANK: $1k → 7%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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$168k · 15 repeat orgs$40k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +23% since the first grant, against -11% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
38

Total granted

$168k
$36k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
-11%

Still filing today

40%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthEducationHousing & ShelterHuman 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

  • BC
    BETH-EL CENTER INC
    5× · 2017–2023 · $9k · revenue +94%
  • OV
    ORANGE VOLUNTEER FIRE ASSOC INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $2k · revenue +105%
  • HA
    HOPE AFTER LOSS INC
    3× · 2017–2020 · $2k · revenue +4%

Funded once

  • YN
    YALE NEW HAVEN HEALTH-BRIDGEPORT HOSPITAL
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $2k
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
Connecticut Amvets Service Foundation Inc

To serve and assist veterans.

Public Benefit
2
The Susan Fund Inc

Grant scholarships to fairfield county connecticut residents who have been diagnosed with cancer and are attending an accredited college.

Education
3
Connecticut Cancer Foundation Inc

To provide funds to benefit families affected by cancer and to support cancer research and education.

—
4
The Cancer Care Fund of the Litchfield Hills Inc

Assist and support cancer patients residing in, or receiving care in northwest Connecticut with care, treatment, education, and prevention programs.

Health
5
Wolcott Volunteer Ambulance Assoc Inc

Volunteer ambulance association that provides emergency medical services and emergency response and transportation for sick and injured in wolcott, ct

Health
6
The Cancer Fund Inc

Contribute money to cancer related organizations to fight cancer on all fronts

Philanthropy
7
Connecticut Health Foundation Inc
Philanthropy
8
Goshen Community Care Inc

Public service

—
9
Canaan Fire Company Inc

Volunteer fire department

Public Safety & Disaster
10
Connecticut State Afl-Cio

Labor union

—
11
The Joe Garassino Foundation Inc

The mission of the joe garassino foundation is to provide resources to persons challenged by cholangiocarcinoma and other cancers in a way that broadens awareness and provides funding for shelter, medicine, and treatment, so that those…

Philanthropy
12
Avon Volunteer Fire Department Inc

Provide firefighting services to the Town of Avon, CT.

Public Safety & Disaster
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hope After Loss Inc; the most unlike its peers is American Legion Post 127. 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

12 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. 12 of the 55 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
6/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NOTRE DAME HIGH SCHOOL: $112,500 · OtherNOTRE DAME HIGH SCHOOLUNITED WAY: $14,250 · OtherUNITED WAYYALE NEW HAVEN HEALTH-BRIDGEPORT HOSPITAL: $9,600 · OtherBRIDGPORT HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $9,000 · OtherMILFORD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TRUST: $7,500 · Other+41 more: $32,375 · Other+41 moreNICOLE DONZELLO FOUNDATION INC: $4,142 · HealthWILLIAM RAVEIS CHARITABLE FUND INC: $3,000 · HealthHOPE AFTER LOSS INC: $1,500 · HealthBRIDGES HEALTHCARE INC: $750 · HealthTHE CANCER COUCH FOUNDATION INC: $500 · HealthBETH-EL CENTER INC: $8,500 · Housing & ShelterTurkey Hill School PTO: $3,000 · EducationTHE VICKI SOTO MEMORIAL FUND INC: $500 · EducationWALK WITH FRANK INC: $1,000 · Human Services
Other$185,225Health$9,892Housing & Shelter$8,500Education$3,500Human Services$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBETH-EL CENTER INC: $8,500 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetNICOLE DONZELLO FOUNDATION INC: $4,142 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetWILLIAM RAVEIS CHARITABLE FUND INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTurkey Hill School PTO: $3,000 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetORANGE VOLUNTEER FIRE ASSOC INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetHOPE AFTER LOSS INC: $1,500 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetWALK WITH FRANK INC: $1,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetBRIDGES HEALTHCARE INC: $750 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CANCER COUCH FOUNDATION INC: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE VICKI SOTO MEMORIAL FUND INC: $500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCONNECTICUT YANKEE COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA: $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.

  • Who funds BETH-EL CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds NICOLE DONZELLO FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds WILLIAM RAVEIS CHARITABLE FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds Turkey Hill School PTO ↗
  • Who funds ORANGE VOLUNTEER FIRE ASSOC INC ↗
  • Who funds HOPE AFTER LOSS INC ↗
  • Who funds WALK WITH FRANK INC ↗
  • Who funds BRIDGES HEALTHCARE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE CANCER COUCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE VICKI SOTO MEMORIAL FUND INC ↗

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 Milford Bank Foun…The Pfizer Foundation…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Milford Bank Foundation IncCT13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Milford Bank Foundation Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · 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 Meisenheimer Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Meisenheimer Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 80%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 23%
  • Bridges Healthcare Inc: 67% of income from government
  • Beth-El Center Inc: 23% of income from government
  • Orange Volunteer Fire Assoc Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
8get no government money at all
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 Meisenheimer Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Meisenheimer Foundation Inc 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 55 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 Meisenheimer’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