Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Kling Family Foundation

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.

$93k
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$40k
Largest
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.

Environment$190kEducation$182kArts & Culture$103kAnimals$102kHealth$45kPhilanthropy$15kYouth Development$10kFood & Nutrition$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $85k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$2.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN$40,000
LAMBERT ART AND CULTURE PROGRAM$35,150
THE TREVOR PROJECT$10,000
WYMAN CENTER$5,000
LANDMARKS ASSOCIATION OF ST LOUIS$2,500
EVANS SCHOLARS FOUNDATION$250
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 60% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%THE TREVOR PROJECT: $10k → 14%SPECIAL OLYMPICS MISSOURI INC: $3k → 10%VARIETY: $20k → 11%LANDMARKS ASSOCIATION OF ST LOUIS: $8k → 21%EVANS SCHOLARS FOUNDATION: $250 → 14%ST ANDREW'S CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $5k → 11%LANDMARKS ASSOCIATION OF ST LOUIS: $8k → 21%EVANS SCHOLARS FOUNDATION: $250 → 14%VARIETY THE CHILDREN'S CHARITY OF ST LOUIS: $5k → 11%LANDMARKS ASSOCIATION OF ST LOUIS: $8k → 21%EVANS SCHOLARS FOUNDATION: $250 → 14%THE WYMAN CENTER: $5k → 11%LANDMARKS ASSOCIATION OF ST LOUIS: $3k → 21%EVANS SCHOLARS FOUNDATION: $250 → 14%ST ANDREW'S CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $5k → 11%MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $40k → 21%EVANS SCHOLARS FOUNDATION: $250 → 14%WYMAN CENTER: $5k → 11%MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $40k → 21%EVANS SCHOLARS FOUNDATION: $250 → 14%ST ANDREW'S CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $5k → 11%MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $40k → 21%EVANS SCHOLARS FOUNDATION: $250 → 14%WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $30k → 11%MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $30k → 21%EVANS SCHOLARS FOUNDATION: $250 → 14%WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $30k → 11%ST LOUIS ZOO: $27k → 21%WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $30k → 11%ST LOUIS ZOO: $25k → 21%WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $30k → 11%ST LOUIS ZOO: $25k → 21%WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $30k → 11%ST LOUIS ZOO: $25k → 21%WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $30k → 11%MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $10k → 21%MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $10k → 21%MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $10k → 21%MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN: $10k → 21%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF ST LOUIS: $2k → 21%BARNES JEWISH HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $5k → 21%FOOD OUTREACH INC: $5k → 21%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.
$601k · 8 repeat orgs$52k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +11% since the first grant, against +8% for those funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
7

Total granted

$601k
$42k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
+8%

Still filing today

63%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
EnvironmentEducationFood & NutritionHealthArts & CulturePhilanthropyOther
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

  • MB
    MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES
    8× · 2017–2024 · $190k · revenue +11%
  • WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
    6× · 2017–2022 · $180k · revenue +76%
  • TW
    THE WYMAN CENTER
    2× · 2018–2024 · $10k · revenue +46%

Funded once

  • V
    VARIETY
    one grant, 2017 · $20k
  • VT
    VARIETY THE CHILDRENS CHARITY OF ST LOUIS
    one grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue +8%
  • FO
    FOOD OUTREACH INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +71%
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
Federation of State Medical Boards of the United States Inc

The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…

Health
2
Truman Medical Center Incorporated

University health is an academic health center providing accessible, state-of-the-art quality healthcare to our community regardless of the ability to pay.

Health
3
Webster University

Founded in 1915, webster is a private non-profit and global university that is committed to delivering high-quality learning experiences that transform students for global citizenship and individual excellence.

Education
4
University of Louisville Physicians Inc

Provide professional medical services in a variety of medical specialties and disciplines in accordance with the corporation's charitable mission: strengthen and broaden the range of skills and patient populations available for physicians…

Health
5
University of Maryland Neurosurgeryassociates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

Education
6
St Martin Hospital Inc

To improve, maintain and restore the health of the people in the communities we serve.

Health
7
Highmark Health

As the parent entity of a blended health organization, highmark health seeks to improve the health and well-being of the people and communities it serves by providing affordable, accessible and high-quality healthcare.

Health
8
St Lukes Episcopal-Presbyterian Hospitals

We are dedicated to providing exceptional care to every patient, every time.

Health
9
University of Maryland Anesthesiology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

—
10
Ssm Health Care St Louis

Through our exceptional health care services, we reveal the healing presence of god.

Health
11
Mission St Louis

Mission: st. louis empowers individuals for social and economic growth through relationships and opportunity.

Community Improvement
12
University of Maryland Oncology Associates Pa

Under the medical service plan of the university of maryland school of medicine, medical services are rendered by the members of the faculty on behalf of the school of medicine in connection with their duties to provide clinical…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Missouri Botanical Garden Board of Trustees; the most unlike its peers is Variety the Childrens Charity of St Louis. 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 16 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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ST LOUIS ZOO: $101,500 · OtherST LOUIS ZOOLAMBERT ART AND CULTURE PROGRAM: $75,150 · OtherLAMBERT ART AND CULTURE PROGRAMVARIETY: $20,000 · OtherVARIETY+7 more: $24,000 · Other+7 moreMISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES: $190,000 · EnvironmentMISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD …WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $180,000 · EducationWASHINGTON UNIVERSITYLANDMARKS ASSOCIATION OF ST LOUIS INC: $27,499 · Arts & CultureST ANDREWS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $15,000 · PhilanthropyTREVOR PROJECT INC: $10,000 · Civil RightsTHE WYMAN CENTER: $10,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$220,650Environment$190,000Education$180,000Arts & Culture$27,499Philanthropy$15,000Civil Rights$10,000Recreation & Sports$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES: $190,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $180,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetLANDMARKS ASSOCIATION OF ST LOUIS INC: $27,499 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetST ANDREWS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetTREVOR PROJECT INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WYMAN CENTER: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetVARIETY THE CHILDRENS CHARITY OF ST LOUIS: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOOD OUTREACH INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR BARNES-JEWISH HOSPITAL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS MISSOURI INC: $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.

  • Who funds MISSOURI BOTANICAL GARDEN BOARD OF TRUSTEES ↗
  • Who funds WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds LANDMARKS ASSOCIATION OF ST LOUIS INC ↗
  • Who funds ST ANDREWS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds TREVOR PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds THE WYMAN CENTER ↗
  • Who funds VARIETY THE CHILDRENS CHARITY OF ST LOUIS ↗
  • Who funds FOOD OUTREACH INC ↗
  • Who funds THE FOUNDATION FOR BARNES-JEWISH HOSPITAL ↗
  • Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS MISSOURI INC ↗

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.

Caleres Cares Charitable TrustFL13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Caleres Cares Charitable Trust · Pott Foundation · World Wide Technology Foundation · Employees Community Fund of the Boeing Company · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · 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 The Kling Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Kling Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–20%
    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 16 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 Kling Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph