Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Martinet 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.

$4k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Food & Nutrition$4kAnimals$4kHealth$4kHuman Services$2kHousing & Shelter$2kYouth Development$800Recreation & Sports$800Arts & Culture$450Other$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$19k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GROW PITTSBURGH$1,600
BRIGHTER BITES$1,000
SENIOR PET AND ANIMAL RESCUE$1,000
WILDLIFE WORKS$400
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 (FY17–20, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 31% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%YOUTHCARE: $500 → 9%HOSPICE OF THE WESTERN RESERVE: $400 → 17%YOUTHCARE: $450 → 9%HOSPICE OF THE WESTERN RESERVE: $350 → 17%YOUTHCARE: $400 → 9%YOUTHCARE: $350 → 9%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.

64%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$13k · 9 repeat orgs$7k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
10

Total granted

$13k
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
+217%

Still filing today

67%
20%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Food & NutritionHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsEducationAnimalsOther
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

  • GP
    GROW PITTSBURGH
    2× · 2023–2024 · $2k · revenue +69%
  • Y
    YOUTHCARE
    4× · 2017–2020 · $2k · revenue +23%
  • BB
    Brighter Bites Inc
    2× · 2023–2024 · $1k · revenue +7%

Funded once

  • GC
    GREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue -6%
  • CL
    CORNELL LAB OF ORNITHOLOGY
    one grant, 2023 · $900
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $800
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
Toledo Northwestern Ohio Food Bank

To enable other community organizations to end hunger. we strive to maximize community resources by effectively obtaining and distributing food through a food collection and distribution system.

Food & Nutrition
2
Hospice & Palliative Care of the Ohio Valley Inc

Helping individuals live with dignity through the final stage of life.

Human Services
3
Ohio United Way

To strengthen the capacity of United Ways across Ohio and to advance the common good for Ohioans.

Philanthropy
4
Global Cleveland

Global cleveland is dedicated to growing northeast ohio's economy by welcoming and connecting international people to opportunities and fostering a more inviting community for those seeking a place to call home.

Human Services
5
Goodwill Industries of Southeastern Michigan Inc

Goodwill provides exceptional opportunities for people facing employment barriers.

—
6
Food & Water Watch

Food & water watch conducts extensive research and public education to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainably produced. so we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of…

Food & Nutrition
7
Goodwill Industries of Greater Cleveland and East Central Ohio Inc

We empower people on their journey to independence through the sale of donated goods, which supports employment programs and family services.

—
8
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health

Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…

Health
9
Diabetes Partnership of Cleveland

Diabetes partnership of cleveland works to provide relevant and sustainable programming, education, resources and supplies to the community in northeast ohio affected by diabetes.

—
10
Goodwill Industries of the Valley Works

Goodwill's mission is to empower individuals, strengthen families, and inspire communities through job skills training and work placement opportunities with a multi-generational approach focused on removing barriers.

Human Services
11
United Way of Central Ohio Inc

United way of central ohio is the local organization that harnesses the power of communities working together - people, nonprofits, businesses and government - to create a stronger, more equitable central ohio. see schedule o.we do this…

Philanthropy
12
The Goodwill Industries of Akron Ohio Inc

Goodwill industries of akron, ohio, inc is a not-for-profit corporation that helps individuals prepare for, find, and retain employment. goodwill serves the five-county region of summit, portage, medina, ashland, and richland. goodwill…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greater Cleveland Food Bank Inc; the most unlike its peers is Wildlife Works Inc. 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

8 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. 8 of the 19 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SENIOR PET AND ANIMAL RESCUE: $1,900 · OtherSENIOR PET AND ANIMAL RESCUELITTLE ANNIES HOPE TRAIN: $1,300 · OtherLITTLE ANNIES HOPE TRAINCLEVELAND CLINIC PHILANTHROPIC INST: $1,250 · OtherCLEVELAND CLINIC PHILANTHROPIC INSTCORNELL LAB OF ORNITHOLOGY: $900 · OtherCORNELL LAB OF ORNITHOLOGYIndividual grant recipient: $800 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSALVATION ARMY: $800 · OtherSALVATION ARMYFIELDSTONE FARM THERAPEUTIC RIDING: $800 · OtherFIELDSTONE FARM THERAPEUTIC RIDINGIndividual grant recipient: $750 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER: $750 · OtherMD ANDERSON CANCER CENTERCLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION: $500 · OtherFRED ROGERS CENTER: $450 · OtherGROW PITTSBURGH: $2,100 · Food & NutritionGROW PITTSBURGHBrighter Bites Inc: $1,350 · Food & NutritionBrighter Bites IncGREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC: $1,000 · Food & NutritionGREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BA…YOUTHCARE: $1,700 · Human ServicesYOUTHCAREHOSPICE OF THE WESTERN RESERVE INC: $750 · Human ServicesHOSPICE OF THE…WILDLIFE WORKS INC: $1,550 · AnimalsTHE FIRST TEE OF CLEVELAND: $800 · Recreation & SportsPELOTONIA: $350 · Education
Other$10,200Food & Nutrition$4,450Human Services$2,450Animals$1,550Recreation & Sports$800Education$350

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 budgetGROW PITTSBURGH: $2,100 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetYOUTHCARE: $1,700 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWILDLIFE WORKS INC: $1,550 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetBrighter Bites Inc: $1,350 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FIRST TEE OF CLEVELAND: $800 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHOSPICE OF THE WESTERN RESERVE INC: $750 over 2y, 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 GROW PITTSBURGH ↗
  • Who funds YOUTHCARE ↗
  • Who funds WILDLIFE WORKS INC ↗
  • Who funds Brighter Bites Inc ↗
  • Who funds GREATER CLEVELAND FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds THE FIRST TEE OF CLEVELAND ↗
  • Who funds HOSPICE OF THE WESTERN RESERVE INC ↗
  • Who funds PELOTONIA ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Martinet Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Martinet Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 19 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 Martinet’s filings →

    More from the funding graph