Skip to content
The Maymere Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Maymere Charitable Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$68k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Arts & Culture$209kPublic Safety & Disaster$40kPhilanthropy$21kHousing & Shelter$16kYouth Development$13kEducation$12kFood & Nutrition$10kAnimals$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $18k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WOLF TRAP FOUNDATION$50,000
A FOREVER HOME$5,000
WESTERN FAIRFAX CHRISTIAN MINISTRIE$5,000
HOMELESS ANIMALS RESCUE TEAM$5,000
TOGETHER WE BAKE$2,500
MOVEMBER FOUNDATION$144
AMIGOS DE LAS AMERICAS$100
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 (FY23–25, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 14% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%TOGETHER WE BAKE: $3k → 9%WESTERN FAIRFAX CHRISTIAN MINISTRIE: $5k → 6%WESTERN FAIRFAX CHRISTIAN MINISTRIE: $5k → 6%WESTERN FAIRFAX CHRISTIAN MINISTRIE: $5k → 6%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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$347k · 9 repeat orgs$82k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
11

Total granted

$347k
$74k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+129%

Still filing today

56%
36%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k 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
Arts & CultureAnimalsInternationalHuman ServicesHealthEducationOther
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

  • WT
    WOLF TRAP FOUNDATION FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS
    9× · 2017–2025 · $253k · revenue +54%
  • WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $30k · revenue +36%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF LYNCHBURG
    2× · 2023–2024 · $10k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • TP
    THE PLUNKETT FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $20k
  • ALL HANDS AND HEARTS SMART RESPONSE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +129%
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
Worldwide Vets Incorporated

Our goal is to sustainably improve animal welfare, provide veterinary care, and improve veterinary education globally. in order to achieve this goal, we work in over 10 countries, across 5 continents, supporting local people and animals,…

Animals
2
Wedontwaste Inc

We Dont Waste increases food access and protects the planet by rescuing and repurposing food, while educating and advocating to increase food security and decrease food waste.

Food & Nutrition
3
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
4
Lycoming County Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Full-service animal shelter, animal care, adoptive services, humane investigaation services and humane education.

Animals
5
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
6
Washington Wildlife & Recreation Coalition

Creating a greener, healthier, more equitable, and better Washington for all through community outreach, network building, and advocacy for conservation and outdoor recreation funding.

—
7
Legal Advocates for Safe Science and Technology Inc

Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.

Science & Tech
8
Danbury Animal Welfare Society

Danbury animal welfare society , inc.(daws) is a non-profit organization dedicated to improving the lives of animals in our community and beyond. we promote responsible pet guardianship and the humane treatment of animals, and work toward…

Animals
9
Cumberland Valley Animal Shelter Inc

Provide shelter for homeless animals and prevent animal cruelty

Animals
10
World Arts West

Founded in 1978, World Arts West is a nationally-recognized leader in advocating for cultural arts communities. Serving the largest multicultural dance and music network in the United States, we are a wraparound cultural artist service…

Arts & Culture
11
Together for West Philadelphia

Together for West Philadelphia partners with healthcare systems community-based organizations, academic institutions, and public and private stakeholders to achieve equitable health outcomes for West Philadelphians.

Unclassified
12
International Society for Arts Science and Technology Dba LeonardoISAST

The mission of the Organization is to identify new avenues to serve the art, science, and technology community. The Organization is recognized as a global leader in the interdisciplinary world of art, science, and technology. For over 50…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Artstream Inc; the most unlike its peers is Movember 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

13 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. 13 of the 24 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
11/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WOLF TRAP FOUNDATION FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS: $252,500 · Arts & CultureWOLF TRAP FOUNDATION FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS+1 more: $5,000 · Arts & CultureIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipie…THE PLUNKETT FOUNDATION: $20,000 · OtherTHE PLUNKETT FOUNDATIONA FOREVER HOME: $20,000 · OtherA FOREVER HOMEOUR NEIGHBORS CHILD: $11,500 · OtherOUR NEIGHBORS CHILDHUMANITARIAN AID RELIEF TRUST: $5,000 · OtherHUMANITARIAN AID RELIEF …Individual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipie…+6 more: $6,200 · Other+6 moreWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $30,000 · International+1 more: $100 · InternationalWestern Fairfax Christian Ministries: $15,000 · Human ServicesTogether We Bake: $2,500 · Human ServicesLYNCHBURG HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $5,500 · AnimalsHOMELESS ANIMALS RESCUE TEAM INC: $5,000 · AnimalsALL HANDS AND HEARTS SMART RESPONSE INC: $10,000 · Public Safety & DisasterUNIVERSITY OF LYNCHBURG: $10,000 · EducationALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $500 · HealthMOVEMBER FOUNDATION: $144 · Health
Arts & Culture$257,500Other$92,700International$30,100Human Services$17,500Animals$10,500Public Safety & Disaster$10,000Education$10,000Health$644

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 budgetWOLF TRAP FOUNDATION FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS: $252,500 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWestern Fairfax Christian Ministries: $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF LYNCHBURG: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLYNCHBURG HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $5,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetARTSTREAM INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMOVEMBER FOUNDATION: $144 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.

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.

American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE7.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get 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 · 0–15%
    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 24 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 Maymere’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