Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Scallorns 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.

$60k
Granted FY2024still arriving
22
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$24k
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, FY2018 to 2024.

Education$93kArts & Culture$81kFood & Nutrition$54kYouth Development$21kReligion$8kHuman Services$6kPublic Safety & Disaster$5kEnvironment$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k20 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $42k
$300
Median grant
7
States reached
$285k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$23,743
UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI$18,300
FEEDING SOUTHWEST VA$5,000
FOOD BANK OF NC MISSOURI$5,000
GRASSROOTS$1,500
Individual grant recipient$1,500
ELMISHA KAKUMA$1,060
LOCAL OFFICE ON AGING$1,000
Individual grant recipient$500
BLACKSBURG REFUGEE PARTNERSHIP$500
JEFFERSON CENTER$300
SEEDS EDUCATIONAL SERVICES$300
POWELL GARDENS$275
ST PAULS LUTHERAN CHURCH$200
CALIFORNIA WOMENS CLUB FOR MGT$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 (FY21–24, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 11% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%LOCAL OFFICE ON AGING: $1k → 8%LOCAL OFFICE ON AGING: $1k → 8%CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF CENT AND NE M: $500 → 10%LOCAL OFFICE ON AGING: $1k → 8%LOCAL OFFICE ON AGING: $1k → 8%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

MN
IL
NY
CA
CO
MO
KY
VA
NC
DC
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$269k · 25 repeat orgs$17k to everyone else

25 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
28

Total granted

$269k
$14k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
+21%

Still filing today

48%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHuman ServicesPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementScience & TechCrime & LegalOther
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

  • MG
    MISSOURI GIRLS TOWN FOUNDATION INC
    5× · 2018–2024 · $20k · revenue +25%
  • FS
    FEEDING SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA
    2× · 2023–2024 · $10k · revenue +7%
  • SN
    SHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK TRUST
    4× · 2018–2022 · $4k · revenue +4%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $3k
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF CENTRAL MISSOURI INC
    one grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue +15%
  • FB
    FOOD BANK FOR CENTRAL AND NE MISSOU
    one grant, 2018 · $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
The Food Bank for Central & Northeast Missouri

The food bank for central & northeast missouri is a regional disaster and hunger relief network that acquires and distributes millions of meals each year to help neighbors get the food they need to thrive. (continued on schedule o)the…

Food & Nutrition
2
Washington Dc Meals on Wheels Inc

We deliver healthy delicious meals to our home-bound neighbors. With a vision of creating a more interconnected resilient and compassionate community our program supports entire family systems. In 2024 236 volunteers delivered 55,642 meals…

—
3
Jefferson National Parks Association

Jefferson national parks association provides quality educational products and related services that enhance public understanding and appreciation of america's national parks, public lands and historic places.

Arts & Culture
4
Jefferson Council On Aging Inc

Our mission is to assist the senior citizens of jefferson parish to age with dignity and independence in the place and manner of their choice.

Human Services
5
Legal Aid of Western Missouri

To improve the lives of those in need through quality legal assistance.

Crime & Legal
6
Meals On Wheels of Central Marylandinc

Meals on wheels of central maryland's charitable mission, to keep homebound people living safely and independently at home through the provision of nutritious meals, personal contact and support services, reduces hospitalization, and…

Food & Nutrition
7
Jefferson Growers Artisans and Prod

Provide locally grown products from local farmers so fresh food can be provided to the local community.

Food & Nutrition
8
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
9
Marian Cheek Jackson Center

To honor, renew, and build community in the historic Northside, Pine Knolls, and Tin-Top neighborhoods of Chapel Hill and Carrboro, NC.

Arts & Culture
10
Forward Through Ferguson

Embracing the ferguson commission's mandate, forward through ferguson centers impacted communities and mobilizes accountable bodies to advance racially equitable systems and policies that ensure all people in the st. louis region can…

Civil Rights
11
Council on Aging Services for Seniors

To enhance the quality of life for our aging community by providing services that promote wellbeing and maintain independence.

—
12
Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International Inc

The Fossey Fund is dedicated to the conservation and study of gorillas in Africa through a successful, people-centered approach: 1) Providing daily protection to gorillas, 2) Scientific research providing critical data on gorillas and…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Missouri Girls Town Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Blacksburg Refugee Partnership 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

21 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 21 of the 61 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/21
Grantees still filing
17/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI: $84,800 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MISSOURIIndividual grant recipient: $77,792 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $16,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientFOOD BANK OF NC MISSOURI: $15,000 · OtherFOOD BANK OF NC MISSOURIFOOD BANK OF CENTRAL AND NE MISSOUR: $11,000 · Other+48 more: $36,021 · Other+48 moreMISSOURI GIRLS TOWN FOUNDATION INC: $20,360 · Crime & LegalFEEDING SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA: $10,000 · Food & NutritionLOCAL OFFICE ON AGING: $4,000 · Human ServicesBlacksburg Refugee Partnership Inc: $1,500 · Human ServicesCatholic Charities of Central and Northern Missouri: $500 · Human ServicesSHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK TRUST: $4,050 · EnvironmentST JOHN NEUMANN ACADEMY: $2,500 · EducationMAROON CRUSH INC: $1,800 · Recreation & Sports
Other$240,613Crime & Legal$20,360Food & Nutrition$10,000Human Services$6,000Environment$4,050Education$2,500Recreation & Sports$1,800

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 budgetMISSOURI GIRLS TOWN FOUNDATION INC: $20,360 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetFEEDING SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK TRUST: $4,050 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetLOCAL OFFICE ON AGING: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetST JOHN NEUMANN ACADEMY: $2,500 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetMAROON CRUSH INC: $1,800 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetBlacksburg Refugee Partnership Inc: $1,500 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetJEFFERSON CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH: $1,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetELIMISHA KAKUMA: $1,060 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetUNITED WAY OF CENTRAL MISSOURI INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPOWELL GARDENS INC: $800 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS INC: $750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCatholic Charities of Central and Northern Missouri: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJEFFERSON CENTER FOUNDATION LTD: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSea Turtle Conservancy: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLOGGERHEAD MARINELIFE CENTER INC: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE MISSOURI GOVERNOR'S MANSION: $192 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 MISSOURI GIRLS TOWN FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds FEEDING SOUTHWEST VIRGINIA ↗
  • Who funds SHENANDOAH NATIONAL PARK TRUST ↗
  • Who funds LOCAL OFFICE ON AGING ↗
  • Who funds ST JOHN NEUMANN ACADEMY ↗
  • Who funds MAROON CRUSH INC ↗
  • Who funds Seeds Educational Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds Blacksburg Refugee Partnership Inc ↗
  • Who funds JEFFERSON CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH ↗
  • Who funds ELIMISHA KAKUMA ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY OF CENTRAL MISSOURI INC ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA PROGRESS INC ↗
  • Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
  • Who funds POWELL GARDENS INC ↗
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS INC ↗
  • Who funds Catholic Charities of Central and Northern Missouri ↗
  • Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
  • Who funds JEFFERSON CENTER FOUNDATION LTD ↗

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.

Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Scallorns Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Scallorns 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%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Sea Turtle Conservancy: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
7report 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 61 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 Scallorns Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph