Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Molly & Ed Shill Cares 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.

$342k
Granted FY2024still arriving
15
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What you fund
0191% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20222024.

Animals$346kHuman Services$93kFood & Nutrition$64kCommunity Improvement$60kHealth$43kEducation$16kEnvironment$10kRecreation & Sports$4kOther$0
02FY2024 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $25k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $117k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $200k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LOLLYPOP FARM$200,000
WILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER$25,000
SPCC$20,000
SPCC$20,000
SPCC$20,000
FERALS AND KITTENS AND CATS OH MY$12,000
HOME START HOPE$10,000
CANANDAIGUA LAKE WATERSHED ASSOCIATION$10,000
WILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER$5,000
UNIVERISITY OF ROCHESTER$5,000
ST PETER'S KITCHEN$5,000
SPCC$4,000
WILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER$2,500
PLUTA CANCER CENTER$2,000
UNIVERISITY OF ROCHESTER$1,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY22–24, $73k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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.

area typical 10%WILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER: $25k → 14%WILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER: $25k → 14%WILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER: $5k → 14%WILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER: $3k → 14%WILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER: $3k → 14%HOME START HOPE: $10k → 14%WILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER: $3k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$583k · 6 repeat orgs$114k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +42% since the first grant, against -26% for the ones you funded once.

6 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
4

Total granted

$583k
$82k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%
-26%

Still filing today

67%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $32k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24
AnimalsHuman ServicesFood & NutritionEducationOther

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

  • TH
    THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER & MONROE COUNTY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO
    3× · 2022–2024 · $311k · revenue +81%
  • ST PETERS KITCHEN INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $64k · revenue +42%
  • WD
    WILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER OF GREATER ROCHESTER INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $63k · revenue +42%

Funded once

  • GC
    GOLISANO CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL
    one grant, 2023 · $39k
  • GA
    GORDY AND FRIENDS INC
    one grant, 2023 · $22k
  • FP
    FAMILY PROMISE GRANT CONTRIBUTION
    one grant, 2023 · $20k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Rockats Inc

Prevention of cruelty to animals to prevent overbreeding to control cat population

Animals
2
Hart

Animal shelter and rescue

Animals
3
Lawrence County Humane Society Inc

The primary purpose of the Lawrence County Humane Society is to relieve pain and suffering among animals to prevent cruelty to animals and to extend humane education to the community

Animals
4
Stray Healthcare & Education to Limit Population

To protect and improve the lives of homeless, free-roaming community cats by assisting both the animals and those who care for them. they achieve this through education, community collaboration, and promoting the benefits of spay/neuter as…

Animals
5
Catnip Cats and Kittens

Catnip Cats & Kittens provides housing, vet care and spay/neuter to pets in our care. We housed over 150 dogs and cats in 2020 providing a safe sanctuary and reducing unwanted pets in the community.

Animals
6
Urban Cat League Inc

Animal welfare for New York City street cats. Provide sanctuary, adoption and fostering. Promote TNR, manage feral cat colonies. Humane education through presentations, videos and our website.

Animals
7
Pet Pride of New York Inc

Pet pride of new york has been saving homeless cats and matching them with caring adopters since 1977. we operate a no-kill cat sanctuary and adoption center with an on-site veterinary medical center where we shelter and care for cats and…

Animals
8
Global Canine and Feline Rescue Association Inc

We rescue cats and dogs suffered on the street and in endangered locations in both new york and china. the mission of our no-kill shelter is to provide stray cats with safe haven and veterinary care before placing them in forever loving…

Animals
9
Kitty Corner of Cny Inc

Provide care,neuter/spaying and adoption

Animals
10
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

The aspca's mission, as stated by founder henry bergh in 1866, is "to provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the united states." the aspca was founded on the belief that animals are entitled to kind and…

Animals
11
Feral Cat Solutions

We are an animal welfare charity. we provide free spay and neuter for outdoor cats in Kent County Michigan

Animals
12
Cat Rescue of Marlborough and Hudson

cat rescue: adoption, rehoming, fostering, trap-neuter-release, education

Animals

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Home Start Hope and the most unlike its peers is Habitat for Cats 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

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 13 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER & MONROE COUNTY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO — $310,818 · AnimalsTHE HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER & MONROE COUNTY FOR …FERALS AND KITTENS AND CATS OH MY — $12,000 · Animals+1 more — $1,000 · AnimalsSPCC — $124,000 · OtherSPCCGOLISANO CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL — $39,000 · OtherGOLISANO CHILDREN'S HOSPITALGORDY AND FRIENDS INC — $22,000 · OtherGORDY AND FRIENDS INCFAMILY PROMISE GRANT CONTRIBUTION — $20,000 · OtherFAMILY PROMISE GRANT CONTRIBUTIONCanandaigua Lake Watershed Association — $10,000 · Other+1 more — $4,000 · OtherWILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER OF GREATER ROCHESTER INC — $63,250 · Human ServicesWILLOW DOME…HOME START HOPE — $10,000 · Human ServicesHOME START …ST PETERS KITCHEN INC — $64,492 · Food & NutritionST PETERS …UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER — $16,000 · Education
Animals$323,818Other$219,000Human Services$73,250Food & Nutrition$64,492Education$16,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTHE HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER & MONROE COUNTY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO — $310,818 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetST PETERS KITCHEN INC — $64,492 over 2y, 5.6% of budgetWILLOW DOMESTIC VIOLENCE CENTER OF GREATER ROCHESTER INC — $63,250 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER — $16,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFERALS AND KITTENS AND CATS OH MY — $12,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetHOME START HOPE — $10,000 over 1y, 6.2% of budgetCanandaigua Lake Watershed Association — $10,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetHabitat For Cats Inc — $1,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budget
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA3× affinity7 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Molly & Ed Shill Cares Foundation 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%your share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–20%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 13 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph