Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Love Tank Foundation

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.

$18k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$5k
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 2025.

Animals$112kHuman Services$24kReligion$13kHealth$6kEducation$2kFood & Nutrition$2kPublic Benefit$250
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$347k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VICKSBURG WARREN HUMANE SOCIETY$5,000
CALVARY BAPTIST CHURCH$5,000
HAVEN HOUSE FAMILY SHELTER$1,000
TRIUMPH CHURCH FOOD PANTRY$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
STONE COUNTY SPCA$1,000
RAINBOW FARMS RIDING CENTER$1,000
WARREN COUNTY CHILDRENS SHELTER$1,000
GALILEE BAPTIST CHURCH$1,000
BEAUTIFUL DELIVERANCE$500
JACOBS LADDER$500
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 (FY17–17, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%RAINBOW FARMS: $3k → 20%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.
$146k · 15 repeat orgs$13k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +3% since the first grant, against -31% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
7

Total granted

$146k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+3%
-31%

Still filing today

40%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHuman ServicesReligionHealthEducationOther
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

  • VH
    VICKSBURG-WARREN HUMANE SOCIETY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $60k · revenue +5%
  • OC
    OKTIBBEHA COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $5k · revenue +143%
  • JL
    JACOB'S LADDER LEARNING CENTER INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $2k · revenue +3%

Funded once

  • RF
    RAINBOW FARMS INC
    one grant, 2017 · $3k · revenue -31%
  • PE
    PENNSYLVANIA EQUINE RESCUE & RETIREMENT
    one grant, 2019 · $1k
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF CITY OF VICKSBURG ANIMAL SHELTER
    one grant, 2023 · $1k
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
Safe Haven Inc
Animals
2
Hart

Animal shelter and rescue

Animals
3
Pleasants County Humane Society Inc

Shelter & loving care for strays

Recreation & Sports
4
Williams County Humane Society

To spay and neuter animals and provide shelter

—
5
Paws Animal Rescue Center

To help rescue unwanted pets

Animals
6
The Rescue House

To take in stray and abandoned cats and care for their medical and shelter needs until they can be adopted by the public.

—
7
Paws and Claws Animal Shelter
Animals
8
Tabby Tails Cat Rescue

To rescue cats in need provide them with necessary medical care and adopt them into forever homes.

Animals
9
Beaverhead Animal Shelter

The mission is to protect and care for homeless animals in the Dillon and Beaverhead county area.

Animals
10
Wags N Wishes

Providing supportive care to homeless animals, help companion animals find new homes.

Animals
11
Hope Fur Paws Rescue

To help injured, abandoned and unwanted animals. We provide food, vet care that includes heartworm prevention and spay or neuter services, shelter and anything else needed.

Animals
12
Van Wert County Humane Society Inc

The van wert county humane society is committed to building a community of responsible pet owners and ending animal cruelty; to offering a safe haven for animals in need; and to attempt through all reasonable avenues to return animals to…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Oktibbeha County Humane Society Inc; the most unlike its peers is Center for Pregnancy Choices. 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

9 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. 9 of the 23 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VICKSBURG-WARREN HUMANE SOCIETY: $59,500 · AnimalsVICKSBURG-WARREN HUMANE SOCIETYPAWS RESCUE: $12,000 · AnimalsPAWS RESCUEOKTIBBEHA COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $4,500 · AnimalsOKTIBBEHA COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY INC+1 more: $1,000 · AnimalsRAINBOW FARMS RIDING CENTER: $12,500 · OtherRAINBOW FARMS RIDING CENTERSTONE COUNTY SPCA: $7,000 · OtherSTONE COUNTY SPCAIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientGALILEE BAPTIST CHURCH: $5,000 · OtherGALILEE BAPTIST CHURCHCALVARY BAPTIST CHURCH: $5,000 · OtherCALVARY BAPTIST CHURCHIndividual grant recipient: $4,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $3,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientJACOBS LADDER: $2,500 · OtherTRIUMPH CHURCH FOOD PANTRY: $2,000 · OtherWARREN COUNTY CHILDRENS SHELTER: $2,000 · Other+4 more: $3,250 · Other+4 moreHAVEN HOUSE FAMILY SHELTER INC: $22,000 · Human ServicesHAVEN HOUSE FAMIL…RAINBOW FARMS INC: $3,000 · Human ServicesRAINBOW FARMS INCBEAUTIFUL DELIVERANCE: $2,500 · ReligionJACOB'S LADDER LEARNING CENTER INC: $2,000 · EducationCENTER FOR PREGNANCY CHOICES: $500 · Health
Animals$77,000Other$51,250Human Services$25,000Religion$2,500Education$2,000Health$500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetVICKSBURG-WARREN HUMANE SOCIETY: $59,500 over 9y, 5.8% of budgetHAVEN HOUSE FAMILY SHELTER INC: $22,000 over 9y, 0.6% of budgetPAWS RESCUE: $12,000 over 6y, 3.2% of budgetOKTIBBEHA COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $4,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetRAINBOW FARMS INC: $3,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetBEAUTIFUL DELIVERANCE: $2,500 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetJACOB'S LADDER LEARNING CENTER INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetHABITAT FOR HORSES INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCENTER FOR PREGNANCY CHOICES: $500 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.

  • Who funds VICKSBURG-WARREN HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds HAVEN HOUSE FAMILY SHELTER INC ↗
  • Who funds PAWS RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds OKTIBBEHA COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds RAINBOW FARMS INC ↗
  • Who funds BEAUTIFUL DELIVERANCE ↗
  • Who funds JACOB'S LADDER LEARNING CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds HABITAT FOR HORSES INC ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR PREGNANCY CHOICES ↗

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 Steve and Melody Golding FoundationMS13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Steve and Melody Golding Foundation · 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 Love Tank Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Love Tank 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Love Tank Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Love Tank Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 23 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 Love Tank’s filings →

    More from the funding graph