Skip to content
The Dollywood Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

The Dollywood Foundation

To share the life and legacy of dolly parton as an inspiration to all children to dream more, learn more,care more and be more.

$534k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$400k
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.

Public Safety & Disaster$2.3MYouth Development$400kHealth$300kEducation$191kFood & Nutrition$175kPhilanthropy$50kHousing & Shelter$49kCommunity Improvement$30k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $400,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $534,375 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $134,375 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.
$400,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$68M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MOUNTAIN WAYS$400,000
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 (FY17–18, $2.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%MOUNTAIN TOUGH RECOVERY TEAM: $1.3M → 12%MOUNTAIN TOUGH RECOVERY TEAM: $750k → 12%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $60k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Region not stated$60k · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: PROGRAM SUPPORT

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

71%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.5M · 4 repeat orgs$1.0M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +18% since the first grant, against -3% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
7

Total granted

$2.5M
$620k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
-3%

Still filing today

50%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $400k 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
EducationHealthHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentPublic Safety & DisasterHousing & 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

  • MT
    MOUNTAIN TOUGH RECOVERY TEAM
    2× · 2017–2018 · $2.0M · 51% of their budget
  • SM
    SMOKY MOUNTAIN AREA RESCUE MINISTRIES INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $200k · revenue +18%
  • SC
    SEVIER COUNTY FOOD MINISTRIES
    4× · 2020–2023 · $175k

Funded once

  • SC
    SEVIER COUNTY FIRE CHEIF'S ASSOCIAT
    one grant, 2019 · $200k
  • TG
    THE GEORGE AND BARBARA BUSH FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $100k · revenue +44%
  • MF
    MALIBU FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue -97%
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
Mountain Housing Opportunities Inc

To provide affordable housing for low-income individuals living in buncombe county and the surrounding areas of north carolina.

Housing & Shelter
2
Housing Hub

Building homes working families can afford. We are dedicated to: providing new, affordable homes to residents in the South Cumberland Plateau of Tennessee; preparing future and current homeowners to both acquire and maintain a safe and…

Housing & Shelter
3
Appalachia Habitat for Humanity Inc

To build new homes and repair current homes for low income families at 0 interest

Housing & Shelter
4
Habitat for Humanity of Burke County Inc

Habitat for humanity works in partnership with god and people everywhere, from all walks of life, to develop communities with gods people in need by building houses, so that there are decent homes in decent communities in whigh gods people…

Housing & Shelter
5
Georgia Mountain Food Bank Inc

Through a network of community partners, the georgia mountain food bank addresses hunger, health, and quality of life by serving those in need.

Food & Nutrition
6
Holston Habitat for Humanity Inc

Seeking to put Gods love into action, Holston Habitat for Humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope.

—
7
Rebuilding Together-Mountain Communities

Repairing homes, revitalizing communites, rebuilding lives

Philanthropy
8
United Way of South Central Tennessee

The united way of south central tennessee's mission is to improve lives by advancing opportunities for education, health, and financial stability for all. its vision is to be the primary community solutions leader for human services.

—
9
Rebuild Hot Springs Area

Rebuild Hot Springs Area is dedicated to providing relief and support to the residents, businesses, and community organizations of Hot Springs, NC, and surrounding areas in times of crisis. Our mission is to mobilize resources, collaborate…

Public Safety & Disaster
10
Tennessee Homeless Solutions

To reduce homelessness and improve family stability by increasing housing resources, administration of hud-mckinney vento funds, and support services through collaborative efforts with partner organizations, when available.

Housing & Shelter
11
Mountain Mediation Services

Provided mediation services and information to clients in six counties of western north carolina to resolve conflicts through mediation between individuals or organizations.

—
12
Avery County Long Term Recovery Group Inc

ACLTRG serves as the central coordinating hub for long-term recovery in Avery County, aligning nonprofit organizations, faith-based partners, volunteers, public agencies, and funders to reduce duplication, maximize resources, and ensure…

Public Safety & Disaster
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Way of Humphreys County; the most unlike its peers is Malibu Foundation. 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

10 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. 10 of the 12 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
4/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MOUNTAIN TOUGH RECOVERY TEAM: $2,000,000 · Human ServicesMOUNTAIN TOUGH RECOVERY TEAMMOUNTAIN WAYS INC: $400,000 · Youth DevelopmentMOUNTAIN WAY…SEVIER COUNTY FIRE CHEIF'S ASSOCIAT: $200,000 · OtherSEVIER COUNT…SEVIER COUNTY FOOD MINISTRIES: $175,000 · OtherSEVIER COUNT…SMOKY MOUNTAIN AREA RESCUE MINISTRIES INC: $199,509 · HealthSMOKY MOU…HELEN ROSS MCNABB CENTER INC: $100,000 · HealthHELEN ROS…THE GEORGE AND BARBARA BUSH FOUNDATION: $100,000 · EducationFIRST BOOK: $90,750 · EducationDOUGLAS CHEROKEE ECONOMIC AUTHORITY INC: $30,000 · EducationMALIBU FOUNDATION: $100,000 · Public Safety & DisasterUNITED WAY OF HUMPHREYS COUNTY: $50,000 · PhilanthropyAPPALACHIA SERVICE PROJECT INC: $48,750 · Housing & Shelter
Human Services$2,000,000Youth Development$400,000Other$375,000Health$299,509Education$220,750Public Safety & Disaster$100,000Philanthropy$50,000Housing & Shelter$48,750

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 budgetMOUNTAIN TOUGH RECOVERY TEAM: $2,000,000 over 2y, 51% of budgetMOUNTAIN WAYS INC: $400,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetSMOKY MOUNTAIN AREA RESCUE MINISTRIES INC: $199,509 over 2y, 12% of budgetHELEN ROSS MCNABB CENTER INC: $100,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMALIBU FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetFIRST BOOK: $90,750 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED WAY OF HUMPHREYS COUNTY: $50,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetAPPALACHIA SERVICE PROJECT INC: $48,750 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetDOUGLAS CHEROKEE ECONOMIC AUTHORITY INC: $30,000 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.

The Community Foundat…Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee IncTN12.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 The Dollywood Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Dollywood Foundation. 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%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 12 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 Dollywood’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