Skip to content
Smarelli Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Smarelli Charitable Trust

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.

$983k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$855k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0189% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Education$1.8MHealth$553kHuman Services$80kInternational$10kRecreation & Sports$5kPublic Safety & Disaster$4kHousing & Shelter$2kYouth Development$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
  • $250k+1 grant · $855k
$20,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PIUS XI HIGH SCHOOL$855,000
EISENHOWER CENTER$100,000
ITALIAN COMMUNITY CENTER$20,000
WOUNDED WARRIORS ABILITIES RANCH$5,000
TWIN BRIDGE RESCUE SQUAD$2,000
LEUKEMIA AND LUMPHOMA SOC BLOOD CANCER UNITED$1,000
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 (FY18–25, $80k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%Italian Community Center Inc: $25k → 17%ITALIAN COMMUNITY CENTER: $20k → 17%Independencefirst Inc: $35k → 17%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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
WI
NY
MA
NV
CA
DC
OK
FL
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.4M · 7 repeat orgs$69k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
17

Total granted

$2.4M
$63k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+1%
+7%

Still filing today

71%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesPublic BenefitEnvironmentPhilanthropyYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • EC
    EISENHOWER CENTER INC
    7× · 2018–2025 · $530k · revenue +1%
  • ST
    SCHOOL THE WORLD INC
    2× · 2019–2021 · $10k · revenue +43%
  • TB
    TWIN BRIDGE RESCUE SQUAD INC
    2× · 2023–2025 · $4k · revenue +12%

Funded once

  • INDEPENDENCE FIRST INC
    one grant, 2018 · $35k · revenue -23%
  • AA
    ALS ASSOCIATION OF GREATER SAN DIEGO
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
  • BROADSCOPE DISABILITY SERVICES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +50%
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
BossAbility Inc
—
2
Down and Dirty Dogs Inc
Animals
3
Friends of Silversource Inc
Human Services
4
The Survivors Inc
Civil Rights
5
Sassys Sidekicks and Rescue Inc
Animals
6
Good Wolf Inc
Education
7
Mighty Companions Inc
Unclassified
8
Dirshu International Inc
Philanthropy
9
Second Chances Inc
—
10
Explorer Mindset Inc
—
11
Defense Innovation Lab Inc
—
12
Resilient Warrior Ranch Inc
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Independence First Inc; the most unlike its peers is Original Dogs Corp. 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

11 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. 11 of the 26 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PIUS XI HIGH SCHOOL: $1,846,466 · OtherPIUS XI HIGH SCHOOL+14 more: $21,950 · OtherEISENHOWER CENTER INC: $530,000 · HealthEISENHOWER CENTER INC+2 more: $7,000 · HealthITALIAN COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $45,000 · Human ServicesINDEPENDENCE FIRST INC: $35,000 · Human ServicesSCHOOL THE WORLD INC: $10,000 · PhilanthropyWOUNDED WARRIORS ABILITIES RANCH CO: $5,000 · Public BenefitORIGINAL DOGS CORP: $250 · Public BenefitTWIN BRIDGE RESCUE SQUAD INC: $4,000 · Public Safety & DisasterSSOS2 INC: $600 · EnvironmentGIRL SCOUTS OF WISCONSIN SOUTHEAST INC: $250 · Youth Development
Other$1,868,416Health$537,000Human Services$80,000Philanthropy$10,000Public Benefit$5,250Public Safety & Disaster$4,000Environment$600Youth Development$250

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEISENHOWER CENTER INC: $530,000 over 7y, 6.1% of budgetITALIAN COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $45,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetINDEPENDENCE FIRST INC: $35,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSCHOOL THE WORLD INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetBROADSCOPE DISABILITY SERVICES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTWIN BRIDGE RESCUE SQUAD INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetNational Kidney Foundation Inc: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSSOS2 INC: $600 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF WISCONSIN SOUTHEAST INC: $250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetORIGINAL DOGS CORP: $250 over 1y, 0.7% 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.

  • Who funds EISENHOWER CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds ITALIAN COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds INDEPENDENCE FIRST INC ↗
  • Who funds SCHOOL THE WORLD INC ↗
  • Who funds WOUNDED WARRIORS ABILITIES RANCH CO ↗
  • Who funds BROADSCOPE DISABILITY SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds TWIN BRIDGE RESCUE SQUAD INC ↗
  • Who funds National Kidney Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds SSOS2 INC ↗
  • Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF WISCONSIN SOUTHEAST INC ↗
  • Who funds ORIGINAL DOGS CORP ↗

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.

United Way of Greater…Baird Foundation IncGreater Milwaukee Fou…Ge Aerospace Foundati…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
United Way of Greater Milwaukee & Waukesha County IncWI13.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of Greater Milwaukee & Waukesha County Inc · Baird Foundation Inc · Greater Milwaukee Foundation Inc · Ge Aerospace Foundation · 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 Smarelli Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Smarelli Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 26 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 Smarelli’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