Skip to content
Roof Family Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Roof Family Foundation Inc

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.

$119k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$119k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Philanthropy$128kHealth$100kHuman Services$48kEducation$43kHousing & Shelter$34kAnimals$19kFood & Nutrition$13kArts & Culture$7kOther$0
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$118,512
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VANGUARD DONOR ADVISED FUND$118,512
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 (FY20–23, $61k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 79% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%BAY AREA RESCUE MISSION: $5k → 9%MICHIGAN FOSTER CARE CLOSET: $3k → 15%BAY AREA RESCUE MISSION: $5k → 9%CHAD TOUGH FOUNDATION: $5k → 14%BAY AREA RESCUE MISSION: $3k → 9%SPECTRUM COMMUNITY SERVICES: $10k → 10%OUR HOUSE: $10k → 14%OUR HOUSE: $10k → 14%OUT HOUSE: $10k → 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.

60%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$243k · 13 repeat orgs$163k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +39% since the first grant, against +35% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 13 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
8

Total granted

$243k
$45k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+35%

Still filing today

69%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $119k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesAnimalsFood & NutritionHousing & ShelterHealthOther
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

  • UO
    University of Michigan
    3× · 2021–2023 · $75k · revenue +96%
  • OH
    OUR HOUSE
    3× · 2020–2023 · $30k · revenue +148%
  • OH
    OPEN HEART KITCHEN OF LIVERMORE INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $13k · revenue +75%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $16k
  • SC
    SPECTRUM COMMUNITY SERVICESgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +37%
  • CD
    CHADTOUGH DEFEAT DIPG FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +26%
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
Michigan Humane Society

To improve and save lives through compassionate care, community engagement and advocacy for animals.

Animals
2
Humane Society of Southwestern Michigan

Humane society of southwestern michigan exists to provide shelter and care for sick, homeless and unwanted animals. in addition, the organization provides adoption services for the animals in its care.

Animals
3
Marin Humane Society

Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.

Animals
4
Animal Care Sanctuary

Animal care sanctuary's lifesaving mission as a no kill organization envisions a community that promotes turning compassion into action for companion animals by: 1.) adopting healthy pet companions into loving homes. 2.) promoting the…

Animals
5
Michigan Anti-Cruelty Society

To maintain and operate a hospital, ambulance and veterinary services for the care of animals. the maintenance and operation of kennels and suitable chambers for the humane destruction of wounded animals.

Animals
6
Partners for Animal Welfare Society

Animal shelter for the protection and care of abused and neglected animals.

Animals
7
Humane Society of South Mississippi

The mission of the humane society is to save and enhance the lives of pets through cooperative and innovative approaches to adoption, spay/neuter, sheltering and community engagement.

Animals
8
Auburn Valley Humane Society

Auburn valley humane society enriches the lives of companion animals and people through animal sheltering, programs, services and community engagement

Animals
9
Michigan Animal Rescue League

The mission of the michigan animal rescue league is to provide the highest quality of life to dogs and cats through rescue, medical care, socialization and behavioral support, short- and long-term sanctuary, adoption, and community…

Animals
10
Macomb County Humane Society

Provide care for homeless/abused animals

Animals
11
Shelter From the Storm Animal Rescue Inc

Reduce the euthanasia rate of healthy and adoptable animals and improve the lives of companion animals by finding permanent homes for animals in need, providing support to communities who do not have access to humane organizations,…

—
12
Humane Society of South Central Mi

Animal shelter - provide a safe haven for animals without homes.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bay Area Rescue Mission; the most unlike its peers is Michigan Foster Care Closet. 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

15 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. 15 of the 22 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)
14/15
Grantees still filing
11/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VANGUARD DONOR ADVISED FUND: $118,512 · OtherVANGUARD DONOR ADVISED FUNDUniversity of Michigan: $75,000 · OtherUniversity of MichiganMONROE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $42,500 · OtherMONROE COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGEIndividual grant recipient: $15,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientST JUDE HOSPITAL: $10,000 · Other+5 more: $28,500 · Other+5 moreOUR HOUSE: $30,000 · Human ServicesOUR HOUSEBAY AREA RESCUE MISSION: $13,000 · Human ServicesBAY AREA RESCUE …SPECTRUM COMMUNITY SERVICES: $10,000 · Human ServicesSPECTRUM COMMUNI…CHADTOUGH DEFEAT DIPG FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Human ServicesCHADTOUGH DEFEAT…MICHIGAN FOSTER CARE CLOSET: $2,500 · Human ServicesPERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY: $9,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON VALLEY: $5,000 · AnimalsLilys Legacy Senior Dog Sanctuary: $2,500 · AnimalsCONSERVATION SOCIETY OF CALIFORNIA: $2,500 · AnimalsOPEN HEART KITCHEN OF LIVERMORE INC: $13,000 · Food & NutritionCHERRY STREET MISSION MINISTRIES: $13,000 · Housing & ShelterSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $10,000 · Health
Other$290,012Human Services$60,500Animals$19,000Food & Nutrition$13,000Housing & Shelter$13,000Health$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUniversity of Michigan: $75,000 over 3y, 9.3% of budgetOUR HOUSE: $30,000 over 3y, 2.9% of budgetOPEN HEART KITCHEN OF LIVERMORE INC: $13,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCHERRY STREET MISSION MINISTRIES: $13,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetBAY AREA RESCUE MISSION: $13,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSPECTRUM COMMUNITY SERVICES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPERFORMING ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY: $9,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCHADTOUGH DEFEAT DIPG FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAnn Arbor Symphony Orchestra Inc: $5,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF HURON VALLEY: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLilys Legacy Senior Dog Sanctuary: $2,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMICHIGAN FOSTER CARE CLOSET: $2,500 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetCONSERVATION SOCIETY OF CALIFORNIA: $2,500 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.

The Pfizer Foundation…Raymond James Charita…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Network for GoodNational Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Pfizer Foundation IncNY11.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Roof Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Roof Family Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Shriners Hospitals for Children: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 22 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 Roof Family’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