Skip to content
Roetzel & Andress Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Roetzel & Andress Charitable Foundation

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.

$147k
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
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, FY2022 to 2025.

Health$62kArts & Culture$53kEducation$43kPhilanthropy$40kHuman Services$34kCrime & Legal$17kRecreation & Sports$5kCommunity Improvement$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k11 grants · $27k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $70k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$4,200
Median grant
3
States reached
$10k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PLAYHOUSE SQUARE$50,000
LIVING WELL MISSIO INC$25,000
GRAND PRAIRIE SERVICES$15,000
OHIO WOMEN'S BAR FOUNDATION$10,000
UNITED METHODIST HOMES & SERVICES$10,000
ZELIES HOME$10,000
COLUMBUS METROPOLITAN CLUB$5,200
THE NEW ALBANY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$4,250
DELAWARE COUNTRY FOUNDATION$4,200
CORNERSTONE OF HOPE$3,500
THE PERRYSBURG ROTARY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$2,500
BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF TOLEDO$2,500
ECHOES OF POLAND FOLK SONG & DANCE ENSEMBLE$2,500
HELPING HAND CENTER$1,000
THE GRACE NETWORK$500
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 (FY23–25, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%GRAND PRAIRIE SERVICES: $15k → 14%GRAND PRAIRIE SERVICES: $10k → 14%UNITED METHODIST HOMES & SERVICES: $10k → 14%GRAND PRAIRIE SERVICES: $250 → 14%CORNERSTONE OF HOPE: $4k → 17%HELPING HAND CENTER: $1k → 14%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.

38%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$96k · 5 repeat orgs$157k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
9

Total granted

$96k
$37k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+42%

Still filing today

100%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 11% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $120k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesFood & NutritionHealthPhilanthropyEducationHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • CO
    COMMUNITY OF BEONAIR PROFESSIONALS INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $30k · revenue +8% · 47% of their budget
  • GP
    GRAND PRAIRIE SERVICES LLC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $25k · revenue +4%
  • TM
    THE METROHEALTH FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $10k · revenue +80%

Funded once

  • UF
    UMH&S FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
  • CM
    CHICAGO METHODIST SENIOR SERVICES
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
  • TN
    Team NEO Foundation
    one grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue 0%
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
Greater Columbus Chamber of Commerce

Advancing a thriving central ohio commmunity by serving as a catalyst for all businesses to grow and flourish. our mission pillars are connections, government relations, strategic business solutions and talent/workforce.

—
2
Greater Cleveland Food Bank Inc

Working together to ensure everyone in our communities has the nutritious food they need every day.

Food & Nutrition
3
Union Health System

To serve our communities by provding innovative and compassionate healthcare.

Health
4
Ohio State Bar Association

The ohio state bar association (the "association") is an unincorporated voluntary non-profit organization. the association was formed to promote justice and advance the interests of the legal profession.

—
5
Ohio Chamber of Commerce

As the state's leading business advocate and resource, the ohio chamber of commerce aggressively champions free enterprise, economic competitiveness and growth for the benefit of all ohioans.

—
6
Ohio Bankers League

Provide comprehensive services that benefit the financial institution industry in ohio.

Community Improvement
7
Ohio United Way

To strengthen the capacity of United Ways across Ohio and to advance the common good for Ohioans.

Philanthropy
8
Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce

The chamber is a member association designed to be the leading advocate for the business community of the greater dayton region. its mission is to work shoulder to shoulder with businesses to help them succeed.

—
9
Greater Owensboro Chamber of Commerce Inc

Providing leadership, advocacy and member services that foster growth and economic prosperity for our region.

—
10
Ohio Business Roundtable

To harness the collective expertise of ohio's ceos to advocate for policies that improve ohio's economic competitiveness.

—
11
United Way of Central Ohio Inc

United way of central ohio is the local organization that harnesses the power of communities working together - people, nonprofits, businesses and government - to create a stronger, more equitable central ohio. see schedule o.we do this…

Philanthropy
12
Toledo Northwestern Ohio Food Bank

To enable other community organizations to end hunger. we strive to maximize community resources by effectively obtaining and distributing food through a food collection and distribution system.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Helping Hand Center; the most unlike its peers is Living Well Mission 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

21 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 29 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
13/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PLAYHOUSE SQUARE: $50,000 · OtherPLAYHOUSE SQUAREUMH&S FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherUMH&S FOUNDATIONCHICAGO METHODIST SENIOR SERVICES: $10,000 · OtherCHICAGO METHODIST SENIOR SERVICESNATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION: $5,000 · OtherTeam NEO Foundation: $5,000 · Other+10 more: $15,150 · Other+10 moreUNITED WAY OF SUMMIT AND MEDINA: $30,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF SUMMIT…OHIO WOMENS BAR FOUNDATION: $10,000 · PhilanthropyOHIO WOMENS BAR FOUN…THE NEW ALBANY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $4,250 · PhilanthropyTHE NEW ALBANY COMMU…DELAWARE COUNTY FOUNDATION: $4,200 · PhilanthropyDELAWARE COUNTY FOUN…GRAND PRAIRIE SERVICES LLC: $25,250 · Human ServicesGRAND PRAIRIE SER…UNITED METHODIST HOMES & SERVICES: $10,000 · Human ServicesUNITED METHODIST …CORNERSTONE OF HOPE INC: $3,500 · Human ServicesCORNERSTONE OF HO…+1 more: $1,000 · Human ServicesLiving Well Mission Inc: $25,000 · HealthLiving Well Mis…THE METROHEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · HealthTHE METROHEALTH…COMMUNITY OF BEONAIR PROFESSIONALS INC: $30,000 · EducationCOMMUNITY OF …+1 more: $500 · EducationZELIE'S HOME: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterCOLUMBUS METROPOLITAN CLUB: $5,200 · Recreation & Sports
Other$95,150Philanthropy$48,450Human Services$39,750Health$35,000Education$30,500Housing & Shelter$10,000Recreation & Sports$5,200

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNITED WAY OF SUMMIT AND MEDINA: $30,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY OF BEONAIR PROFESSIONALS INC: $30,000 over 2y, 47% of budgetGRAND PRAIRIE SERVICES LLC: $25,250 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE METROHEALTH FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetOHIO WOMENS BAR FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 38% of budgetCOLUMBUS METROPOLITAN CLUB: $5,200 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTeam NEO Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE NEW ALBANY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $4,250 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPERRYSBURG ROTARY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetHELPING HAND CENTER: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE GRACE NETWORK: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHARRY CHAPIN FOOD BANK OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY: $500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAKRON-CANTON REGIONAL FOODBANK: $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.

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.

Premier Bank Foundati…American Electric Pow…Columbus FoundationJpmorgan Chase Founda…Charities Aid Foundat…The Blackbaud Giving …National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…
Premier Bank FoundationOH15.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Premier Bank Foundation · American Electric Power Foundation · Columbus Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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 Roetzel & Andress Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Roetzel & Andress Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 29 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 Roetzel & Andress’ 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