Skip to content
Smith & Atcheson Fund for Excellence Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Smith & Atcheson Fund for Excellence 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.

$81k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$16k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Animals$204kFood & Nutrition$62kReligion$45kEducation$33kInternational$28kEmployment$15kCommunity Improvement$10kHealth$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $61k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MERCY FOR ANIMALS$15,750
VEGAN OUTREACH$15,000
INNOVATIVE ANIMAL AG$10,500
HAZLEHURST IN BLOOM$10,000
CHRISTIAN APPALACHIAN PROJECT$10,000
FISH WELFARE INITIATIVE$9,000
GREENER BY DEFAULT$5,500
NEW ROOTS INSTITUTE$5,346
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 (FY20–20, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CATHOLIC CHARITIES - NEW HAMPSHIRE: $5k → 7%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

NH
IL
NY
MA
CA
CO
KY
VA
MD
DC
MS
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 53% of Smith & Atcheson Fund for Excellence Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 16% of the giving stays in DC; by stated purpose, 10%.

Smith & Atcheson Fund for Excellence Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$365k · 15 repeat orgs$67k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +50% since the first grant, against +30% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
11

Total granted

$365k
$47k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+30%

Still filing today

80%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
AnimalsFood & NutritionInternationalEducationHuman ServicesOther
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

  • MF
    MERCY FOR ANIMALS INC
    5× · 2019–2024 · $51k · revenue +49%
  • VO
    VEGAN OUTREACH INC
    6× · 2018–2024 · $50k · revenue +3%
  • TG
    THE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC
    6× · 2018–2023 · $46k · revenue +237%

Funded once

  • PF
    PEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +61%
  • TH
    THE HUMANE LEAGUEgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +38%
  • CC
    COPIAH COUNTY ANIMAL SHELTER INC
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue -16%
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
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
2
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
3
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
4
Animal Agriculture Alliance

The animal agriculture alliance is a nonprofit organization that helps bridge the communication gap between farm and fork. we connect food industry stakeholders, engage food chain influencers and promote consumer choice by helping key…

Food & Nutrition
5
Wildaid Inc

Wildaid's mission is to inspire change and empower the world to protect wildlife and vital habitats from critical threats.

Animals
6
Farm Sanctuary Inc

We pursue bold solutions to end animal agriculture and foster just and compassionate vegan living through education and policy advocacy.

Animals
7
Animal Equality

Animal equality is an international organization working with society, governments, and companies to end cruelty to farmed animals.

Animals
8
Better Food Foundation Inc

To promote dietary changes to build a healthy, equitable, humane, and environmentally-sustainable food system.

Food & Nutrition
9
Humane Farm Animal Care

Every farmer and rancher participating in the Certified Humane program had to modify their operations to meet the Animal Care Standards and be certified. Schedule O

Animals
10
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
11
Animal Welfare Institute

Since 1951, the animal welfare institute has been dedicated to alleviating animal suffering caused by people. we seek to improve the welfare of animals everywhere: in agriculture, in commerce, in our homes and communities, in research, and…

Animals
12
Institute for Animal Happiness

Growing respect and acceptance for veganism through our dedicated work of rescue and creative care, impactful vegan food programs, vibrant education, and consistent advocacy; all strengthened by our engagement with a rising global network…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mercy for Animals Inc; the most unlike its peers is Piney Woods School. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

22 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. 22 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/22
Grantees still filing
20/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MERCY FOR ANIMALS INC: $50,750 · AnimalsMERCY FOR ANIMALS INCFISH WELFARE INITIATIVE: $29,025 · AnimalsFISH WELFARE INITIATIVEANIMAL OUTLOOK INC: $15,533 · AnimalsANIMAL OUTLOOK INCINNOVATE ANIMAL AG: $15,500 · AnimalsINNOVATE ANIMAL AGPEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS INC: $5,000 · AnimalsTHE HUMANE LEAGUE: $5,000 · AnimalsCOPIAH COUNTY ANIMAL SHELTER INC: $5,000 · Animals+1 more: $3,000 · AnimalsVEGAN OUTREACH INC: $50,286 · Food & NutritionVEGAN OUTREACH INCTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $46,463 · Food & NutritionTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INCGREENER BY DEFAULT: $5,500 · Food & NutritionNew Roots Institute: $5,346 · Food & NutritionSTEP UP: $22,500 · OtherSTEP UPBIKES NOT BOMBS INC: $15,000 · OtherBIKES NOT BOMBS INCFish Welfare Initiative: $12,500 · OtherFish Welfare InitiativeHAZLEHURST IN BLOOM: $10,000 · OtherHAZLEHURST IN BLOOMEncompass Inc: $7,000 · OtherEncompass IncCATHOLIC CHARITIES USA: $5,000 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITIES USAMary's Center for Maternal and Child Care Inc: $5,000 · OtherMary's Center for Mater…HAZLEHURST (MS) GARDEN CLUB: $5,000 · OtherHAZLEHURST (MS) GARDEN …ANIMAL ADVOCACY AFRICA: $5,000 · OtherANIMAL ADVOCACY AFRICA+2 more: $3,500 · OtherCHRISTIAN APPALACHIAN PROJECT INC: $40,000 · Human ServicesCHRISTIAN A…New Hampshire Catholic Charities: $5,000 · Human ServicesNew Hampshi…Piney Woods School: $20,450 · EducationAMERICAN INDIAN COLLEGE FUND: $12,500 · EducationCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA: $20,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $7,500 · International
Animals$128,808Food & Nutrition$107,595Other$90,500Human Services$45,000Education$32,950International$27,500

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 budgetMERCY FOR ANIMALS INC: $50,750 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetVEGAN OUTREACH INC: $50,286 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetTHE GOOD FOOD INSTITUTE INC: $46,463 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCHRISTIAN APPALACHIAN PROJECT INC: $40,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFISH WELFARE INITIATIVE: $29,025 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetPiney Woods School: $20,450 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCHILDFUND INTERNATIONAL USA: $20,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetANIMAL OUTLOOK INC: $15,533 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetINNOVATE ANIMAL AG: $15,500 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetBIKES NOT BOMBS INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetAMERICAN INDIAN COLLEGE FUND: $12,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $7,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEncompass Inc: $7,000 over 3y, 4.5% of budgetGREENER BY DEFAULT: $5,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNew Roots Institute: $5,346 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPEOPLE FOR THE ETHICAL TREATMENT OF ANIMALS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HUMANE LEAGUE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOPIAH COUNTY ANIMAL SHELTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 9.7% of budgetNew Hampshire Catholic Charities: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMary's Center for Maternal and Child Care Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCAPITOL HILL ARTS WORKSHOP: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Humane America Animal…Animal Charity Evalua…The Greenbaum Foundat…The Quinn FoundationRsf Social Finance IncSilicon Valley Commun…Vanguard Charitable E…Paypal Charitable Giv…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…Network for GoodDonor Advised Charita…
Humane America Animal FoundationCA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Humane America Animal Foundation · Animal Charity Evaluators · The Greenbaum Foundation · The Quinn Foundation · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Smith & Atcheson Fund for Excellence Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Smith & Atcheson Fund for Excellence Inc. 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Bikes Not Bombs Inc: 2% of 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
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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Smith & Atcheson Fund for Excellence’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