· Private foundation
Robert & Mary Davis Foundation
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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OHIO MASONIC TEMPLE FOUNDATION | $895,000 |
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 (FY19–21, $28k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 31% of Robert & Mary Davis Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 100% of the giving stays in OH; read by stated purpose it is 69% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +149% since the first grant, against +89% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 1 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, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $895k 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
- DMDAYTON MASONIC FOUNDATION4× · 2020–2023 · $1.2M · revenue +218% · 66% of their budget
- KIKids in New Directions5× · 2017–2024 · $33k · revenue +77%
- HOHOUSE OF BREAD3× · 2017–2023 · $11k · revenue +5%
Funded once
- DCDAYTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITALgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $137k · revenue +27%
- TOTHE OHIO MASONIC HOMEgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $20k · revenue +60%
- FCFAIRMONT CHURCHone grant, 2017 · $10k
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.
The mission of the Foundation is to enhance and expand the capacity of the Dayton Metro Library to accomplish its mission and goals.
The dayton art institute is committed to enriching the community by creating meaningful experiences with art that are available to all.
To build broad based private/public partnerships supporting the conservation and enhancement of our City's parks and greenspaces.
To lead and equip ohio philanthropy to be effective partners for change in our communities.
None
Dayton children's hospital foundation (the foundation) exists solely to benefit dayton children's hospital, dayton, ohio (dch), and to assist dch in performing its charitable mission.
The hospice of dayton, inc. is committed to making quality hospice care available and accessible to terminally ill persons and their families, regardless of ability to pay, and in a manner consistent with the highest hospice standards. our…
Perform fundraising functions, provide financial support, carryout the purpose and otherwise operating for the benefit of the zoological society of cincinnati.
We advance the health, welfare and safety of animals and people.
We connect your life to wildlife while inspiring lifelong learning and conservation action.
The intent is for the ohio masonic home benevolent endowment foundation to follow the mission of the ohio masonic home. the ohio masonic home's adopted mission is to be the trusted partner to help our communities thrive.
Ronald mcdonald house charities of dayton's mission is to provide community, comfort, and hope to families of seriously ill children.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dayton History and the most unlike its peers is House of Bread. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 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. 12 of the 29 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
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.
- Who funds DAYTON MASONIC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DAYTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL ↗
- Who funds Kids in New Directions ↗
- Who funds THE OHIO MASONIC HOME ↗
- Who funds HOUSE OF BREAD ↗
- Who funds ANTIOCH SHRINE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Greater Dayton Public Television dba Think TV ↗
- Who funds KNIGHTS TEMPLAR EYE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HOMEFULL ↗
- Who funds DAYTON HISTORY ↗
- Who funds Wegerzyn Gardens Foundation ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
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: The Dayton Foundation · Dayton Foundation Depository · Dayton Foundation Plus Inc · Virginia W Kettering Foundation Xxxxx3003 · Levin Family Foundation · Mathile Family Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Robert & Mary Davis 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.
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.