Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Matthias Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$64k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$188kHealth$95kInternational$40kYouth Development$30kHuman Services$30kEnvironment$29kEducation$25kPublic Benefit$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $55k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$644k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF THE BIG WOOD$20,000
HANDS TO LOVE$15,000
DIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE$10,000
BLAINE COUNTY CHARITABLE FUND$10,000
BENEVOLENCE AND BEYOND$5,000
NATURE CONSERVANCY$3,000
WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST$1,000
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 (FY22–23, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%WINTER PARK DAY NURSERY: $15k → 13%WINTER PARK DAY NURSERY: $10k → 13%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

ID
WI
IA
CA
VA
NC
TX
FL
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.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$333k · 8 repeat orgs$102k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +48% since the first grant, against +26% for those funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
7

Total granted

$333k
$77k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+48%
+26%

Still filing today

63%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 59% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k 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
InternationalHealthEnvironmentHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentReligionOther
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

  • CH
    CONGENITAL HAND CAMP INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $95k · revenue +256%
  • WP
    WINTER PARK DAY NURSERY INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $25k · revenue +5%
  • WR
    WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO
    8× · 2017–2024 · $8k · revenue +121%

Funded once

  • FU
    FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OF WP
    one grant, 2022 · $30k
  • YL
    YOUNG LIFE
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +18%
  • HF
    Hope For Lifegraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +130%
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
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
2
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
3
Glacier National Park Conservancy

The glacier national park conservancy works to preserve and protect glacier national park for future generations.

Recreation & Sports
4
Lifewater Inc

Lifewater international is a non-profit christian water development organization dedicated to effectively serving vulnerable children and families by partnering with underserved communities to overcome water poverty.

Environment
5
Wildlife Conservation Network Inc

Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.

Animals
6
Living Waters Bible Camp Inc

Reach, train, and equip individuals to become servant leaders through the truth of god's word, intentional godly relationships, and adventures in his creation. our vision is to be a christian resource for leadership development and…

—
7
Western Rivers Conservancy

Western rivers conservancy's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states. continued on schedule o.we acquire land to conserve critical habitat, provide public access for compatible use and enjoyment, and…

Environment
8
Howell Nature Center

Provide outdoor activities for use by church groups, schools, businesses, and individuals. hnc main mission is the teaching of people to be faithful caretakers of one another and the world around us.

—
9
Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation

This member-supported organization protects and restores iowa's land, water and wildlife for future generations. priorities include permanent land protection, promotion of improved land management and bringing new conservation…

Environment
10
The Wildlands Conservancy

The Wildlands Conservancy's dual mission is to preserve the beauty and biodiversity of the earth and to provide programs so that children may know the wonder and joy of nature.

Environment
11
University Camps

Unicamp student volunteers harness the healing power of the wilderness to provide a unique outdoor camping experience for at-risk children. through relationship-building, leadership and character development, and just plain fun, unicamp…

—
12
Wildlands Restoration Volunteers

Building diverse communities that care for the land.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Young Life; the most unlike its peers is Hope for Life. 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

11 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. 11 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)
10/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF THE BIG WOOD: $106,000 · OtherPRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF THE BIG WOODFIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH: $41,250 · OtherFIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCHFIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OF WP: $30,000 · OtherFIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OF WPSUPPORT OUR SCHOLARS: $25,000 · OtherSUPPORT OUR SCHOLARSTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $21,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYDIOCESE OF CHARLOTTE: $10,000 · Other+6 more: $19,250 · Other+6 moreCONGENITAL HAND CAMP INC: $95,000 · HealthCONGENITAL HAND CAMP IN…AGUA VIVA SERVES INC: $30,000 · InternationalAGUA VIVA…Hope For Life: $10,000 · InternationalHope For …WINTER PARK DAY NURSERY INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesYOUNG LIFE: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentBLAINE COUNTY CHARITABLE FUND INC: $10,000 · Public BenefitWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO: $8,000 · Environment
Other$252,500Health$95,000International$40,000Human Services$25,000Youth Development$25,000Public Benefit$10,000Environment$8,000

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 budgetCONGENITAL HAND CAMP INC: $95,000 over 8y, 22% of budgetAGUA VIVA SERVES INC: $30,000 over 3y, 4.4% of budgetWINTER PARK DAY NURSERY INC: $25,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetYOUNG LIFE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $21,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetHope For Life: $10,000 over 1y, 8.6% of budgetBLAINE COUNTY CHARITABLE FUND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO: $8,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetSUN VALLEY SUMMER SYMPHONY INC: $2,250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetInterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSA: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHIGHER GROUND USA INC: $1,000 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 CONGENITAL HAND CAMP INC ↗
  • Who funds AGUA VIVA SERVES INC ↗
  • Who funds WINTER PARK DAY NURSERY INC ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG LIFE ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds Hope For Life ↗
  • Who funds BLAINE COUNTY CHARITABLE FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO ↗
  • Who funds SUN VALLEY SUMMER SYMPHONY INC ↗
  • Who funds InterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSA ↗
  • Who funds HIGHER GROUND USA 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.

Network for GoodDC8.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Network for Good · 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 Matthias Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Matthias Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get 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 · 0–40%
    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 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 Matthias’ filings →

    More from the funding graph