· Private foundation
Miner Charitable Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k63 grants · $73k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $28k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $17,500 |
| WATSEKA FOOD PANTRY | $10,000 |
| MILFORD CHRISTIAN CHURCH | $5,000 |
| CRESCENT CITY UNITED METHODIST | $4,000 |
| FOOD FROM THE HEART | $2,500 |
| WATSEKA FAMILY FESTIVAL | $2,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,500 |
| FORD IROQ 4-H FOUNDATION | $1,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–22, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +43% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.
156 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2025, 135 since wound down; 44 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 49% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $51k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- TBTHE BABY FOLD4× · 2017–2020 · $8k · revenue +44%
- DFDOGS FOR THE DEAF INC DBA DOGS FOR BETTER LIVES4× · 2017–2020 · $1k · revenue +72%
- GSGOOD SHEPHERD MANOR INC2× · 2019–2020 · $600 · revenue +48%
Funded once
- ICIROQ CO SHERIFF DEPTone grant, 2023 · $500k
- CYCROSSROADS YOUTH CENTER INCone grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue -68%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $25k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…
To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.
To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.
HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…
Our vision is a world where humans treat animals with respect, empathy and understanding. four paws mission is to be the strong, global and independent voice for animals.
Since 1944, the north shore animal league america's mission has been to save the lives of pets through adoption, rescue, education, medical care, spay/neuter and advocacy.
Protection of animal rights
Every farmer and rancher participating in the Certified Humane program had to modify their operations to meet the Animal Care Standards and be certified. Schedule O
To ensure every companion animal has access to quality medical care, compassionate shelter, and a loving home.
The mission of the akc canine health foundation, inc. is to fund, advance, and communicate canine health research and science through knowledge and discovery.
World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Food for the Poor Inc and the most unlike its peers is Iroquois County Ramp Builders Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 49 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 12% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
55 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 55 of the 493 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Iroquois Federal Foundation Inc · Mary Helen Roberts Trust · AbbVie Foundation · Paul & Norma Schaumburg Charitable · Raymond F Donovan Trust 1015010096 · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Miner Charitable Foundation Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Feed the Children Inc — 1% of income from government
- Food for the Poor Inc — 0% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.