Skip to content
Rotary Foundation of Cincinnati at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Rotary Foundation of Cincinnati

To provide the leadership, funding, and resources necessary to support the diverse humanitarian efforts of the rotary club of cincinnati.

$323k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$143k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$1.6MHealth$349kRecreation & Sports$84kCommunity Improvement$43kEducation$36kYouth Development$24kHousing & Shelter$7k
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $212,597, the rows itemized in this filing. The $323,284 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $110,687 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $197k
$53,660
Median grant
1
States reached
$7.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CAMP ALLYNSTEPPING STONE CENTER$142,937
PROVISIONS ENTERPRISES LLC$53,660
CINCINNATI PARKS FOUNDATION$10,000
CINCINNATI SLED HOCKEY$6,000
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 (FY17–24, $1.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CAMP ALLYNSTEPPING STONE CENTER: $366k → 9%Camp AllynStepping Stone Center: $278k → 9%CAMP ALLYNSTEPPING STONE CENTER: $179k → 9%CAMP ALLYNSTEPPING STONE CENTER: $177k → 9%CAMP ALLYNSTEPPING STONE CENTER: $170k → 9%CAMP ALLYNSTEPPING STONE CENTER: $162k → 9%CAMP ALLYNSTEPPING STONE CENTER: $143k → 9%CAMP ALLYNSTEPPING STONE CENTER: $138k → 9%COMMUNITY MATTERS CINCINNATI: $7k → 16%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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.0M · 5 repeat orgs$167k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +53% since the first grant, against +43% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
7

Total granted

$2.0M
$97k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+53%
+43%

Still filing today

80%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $70k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Recreation & SportsHuman ServicesHealthYouth DevelopmentSocial ScienceOther
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

  • AC
    AUTISM CONNECTIONS
    5× · 2017–2022 · $161k · revenue +230%
  • DS
    DOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION OF GREATER CINCINNATI
    5× · 2017–2022 · $161k · revenue +70%
  • CH
    CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER
    4× · 2017–2022 · $28k · revenue +53%

Funded once

  • GM
    GAMBLE MONTESSORI ELEMENTARY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $29k
  • GS
    Girl Scouts of Western Ohio
    one grant, 2020 · $24k · revenue +11%
  • FC
    FC CINCINNATI FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $14k · revenue +151%
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
Cincinnati Center for Autism

We support individuals with autism and their families through programming in the areas of academics, adaptive behavior, communication, and social participation.

Education
2
Cincinnati Usa Regional Chamber Foundation

To develop and promote economic development, talent initiatives and the unique offerings in the cincinnati region.

Community Improvement
3
Cincinnati Concours D'elegance Foundation

The cincinnati concours foundation produces a three day weekend of fundraisers to benefit the juvenile arthritis programs and services of the arthritis foundation ohio river valley/great lakes region

Health
4
Cincinnati Usa Regional Chamber

To grow the vibrancy and economic prosperity of the cincinnati region.

—
5
Cintrifuse

To empower Cincinnati entrepreneurs to launch bold, scalable startups; and we work to improve the odds of those startups growing into transformational companies.

Community Improvement
6
Hillel the Foundation of Jewish Campus Life

The purpose of Hillel is to be a center for enriching the lives of Jewish students in the Greater Cincinnati area and to strengthen Jewish identity through social and a broad range of programs and services in an atmosphere that is…

—
7
Cincinnati Scholarship Foundation

The mission of the organization is to connect students residing in greater cincinnati with post-high school scholarship opportunities to pursue their educational goals

—
8
Cincinnati Aquatic Club

To offer children and young adults a top quality program that develops, trains and competes as competitive swimmers year-round in a supportive and motivating enviroment that respects, challenges and nurtures them as athletes, students, and…

Recreation & Sports
9
City Club of Cincinnati

Nurture friendships and exchange ideas

—
10
Legal Aid Society of Cincinnati

To resolve serious legal problems of low income people, to promote economic and family stability, and reduce poverty through effective legal assistance.

—
11
The Jewish Foundation of Cincinnati
Philanthropy
12
Spirit of Cincinnati

Welcomers community volunteer network of cincinnati usa/ northern kentucky is a network designed to connect area residents, who enjoy volunteering and welcoming visitors, with local attractions and arts, cultural and special events. the…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rotary Club of Cincinnati; the most unlike its peers is Cincinnati Sled Hockey. 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

13 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. 13 of the 15 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

STEPPING STONES INC: $1,612,139 · Human ServicesSTEPPING STONES INC+1 more: $7,000 · Human ServicesDOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION OF GREATER CINCINNATI: $160,635 · OtherDOWN SYNDROME …PROVISIONS ENTERPRISES LLC: $53,660 · OtherPROVISIONS ENT…GAMBLE MONTESSORI ELEMENTARY FOUNDATION: $28,656 · OtherGAMBLE MONTESS…MARVIN LEWIS COMMUNITY FUND: $26,000 · OtherMARVIN LEWIS C…ROTARY CLUB OF CINCINNATI: $9,700 · OtherAUTISM CONNECTIONS: $160,635 · HealthAUTISM CO…CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER: $27,600 · HealthCHILDREN'…Girl Scouts of Western Ohio: $23,543 · Youth DevelopmentUPSPRING: $7,000 · Youth DevelopmentFC CINCINNATI FOUNDATION: $14,000 · Recreation & SportsCincinnati Parks Foundation: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsCincinnati Sled Hockey: $6,000 · Recreation & SportsTHE ALPAUGH FAMILY ECONOMICS CENTER FOR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH: $7,000 · Social Science
Human Services$1,619,139Other$278,651Health$188,235Youth Development$30,543Recreation & Sports$30,000Social Science$7,000

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 budgetSTEPPING STONES INC: $1,612,139 over 8y, 8.2% of budgetAUTISM CONNECTIONS: $160,635 over 5y, 18% of budgetDOWN SYNDROME ASSOCIATION OF GREATER CINCINNATI: $160,635 over 5y, 2.8% of budgetCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER: $27,600 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMARVIN LEWIS COMMUNITY FUND: $26,000 over 2y, 66% of budgetGirl Scouts of Western Ohio: $23,543 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFC CINCINNATI FOUNDATION: $14,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetCincinnati Parks Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetROTARY CLUB OF CINCINNATI: $9,700 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetTHE ALPAUGH FAMILY ECONOMICS CENTER FOR EDUCATION AND RESEARCH: $7,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCommunity Matters Cincinnati Inc: $7,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetUPSPRING: $7,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCincinnati Sled Hockey: $6,000 over 1y, 3.1% 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 Greater Cincinnat…Johnson Charitable Gi…Duke Energy FoundationCharities Aid Foundat…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Greater Cincinnati FoundationOH17.1× affinity6 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Greater Cincinnati Foundation · Johnson Charitable Gift Fund · Duke Energy Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Rotary Foundation of Cincinnati funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rotary Foundation of Cincinnati. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%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
    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
    ⤢ 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 15 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 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 Rotary Foundation of Cincinnati’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