Skip to content
The Steel Technologies Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The Steel Technologies Foundation Inc

The steel technologies foundation was established in 2004 to support charitable activities in the communities where steel technologies' employees and customers of steel technologies live and work.

$319k
Granted FY2023
3
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$235k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2023.

Public Safety & Disaster$1.6MHealth$60kHuman Services$17kFood & Nutrition$10kHousing & Shelter$10k
02FY2023 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $255,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $319,400 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $64,400 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $235k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SUPPORTING HEROES$235,000
WHAS CRUSADE FOR CHILDREN$10,000
ENDURE ATHLETICS FOUNDATION$10,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 88% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $10k → 14%ENDURE ATHLETICS FOUNDATION: $10k → 9%WHAS CRUSADE FOR CHILDREN: $10k → 15%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $10k → 14%CRUSADE FOR CHILDREN: $7k → 15%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $10k → 14%HAVE A HEART FOUNDATION: $5k → 15%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $10k → 14%CRUSADE FOR CHILDREN: $5k → 15%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $5k → 14%CRUSADE FOR CHILDREN: $5k → 15%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.6M · 5 repeat orgs$15k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2023, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
1

Total granted

$1.6M
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
+390%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
HealthCrime & LegalHuman ServicesPhilanthropyFood & NutritionOther
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

  • SH
    SUPPORTING HEROES INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $1.5M · revenue +26% · 29% of their budget
  • AN
    American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches
    5× · 2017–2024 · $50k · revenue +46%
  • AH
    American Heart Association Inc
    5× · 2017–2021 · $45k · revenue +33%

Funded once

  • HA
    HAVE A HEART FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +390%
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 Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Fdn Group

Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.

—
2
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
3
The Heart Foundation

The heart foundation (thf) was created to save lives from heart disease by increasing awareness, educating the public, and supporting innovative research at smidt heart institute at cedars-sinai medical center in los angeles, california.…

Philanthropy
4
Children's Health Care

We champion the health needs of children and families. we are committed to improving children's health by providing the highest-quality, family centered care, advanced through research and education.

Health
5
American Lung Association

The american lung association's mission is to save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung disease. we do this through education, advocacy, and research.

Health
6
American Kidney Fund Inc

The mission of the american kidney fund is to fight kidney disease and help people live healthier lives. founded in 1971, akf fights kidney disease on all fronts with a comprehensive scope of programs that support people across the…

—
7
Cystic Fibrosis Foundation

To cure cf and provide all people with cf the opportunity to lead long, fulfilling lives by funding research and drug development, partnering with the cf community, and advancing high-quality, specialized care.

Health
8
American Institute for Cancer Research

Aicr champions the latest and most authoritative scientific research from around the world on cancer prevention and survival through diet, weight and physical activity, so that we can help people make informed lifestyle choices to reduce…

Health
9
Conquering Congenital Heart Disease

At conquering chd we exist to conquerin the most common birth defect. we engage, listen, learn, and act. we create visibility and empower all impacted by chd. we accomplish this through awareness, knowledge, community and research.

Health
10
Baptist Memorial Hospital-Desoto Inc

Baptist memorial hospital-desoto, inc. provides quality medical health care regardless of race, creed, sex, national origin, handicap, or age. its mission is to serve the community with respect to providing health care services and health…

Health
11
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc

The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…

Health
12
Blood Cancer United Inc

Our mission is to cure leukemia, lymphoma, hodgkin's disease and myeloma, and improve the quality of life of patients and their families.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Whas Crusade for Children Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation 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

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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
9/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SUPPORTING HEROES INC: $1,502,302 · Crime & LegalSUPPORTING HEROES INCAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $50,000 · Human ServicesAmerican Heart Association Inc: $45,000 · HealthHAVE A HEART FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · HealthTHE WHAS CRUSADE FOR CHILDREN INC: $26,500 · OtherENDURE ATHLETICS FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · PhilanthropyDARE TO CARE INC: $10,000 · Food & Nutrition
Crime & Legal$1,502,302Human Services$50,000Health$50,000Other$26,500Philanthropy$10,000Food & Nutrition$10,000

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 budgetSUPPORTING HEROES INC: $1,502,302 over 8y, 29% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $50,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $45,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WHAS CRUSADE FOR CHILDREN INC: $26,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetENDURE ATHLETICS FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetDARE TO CARE INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHAVE A HEART FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 2.1% 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.

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 Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA3.2× affinity5 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 Steel Technologies Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Steel Technologies Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%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 · 0–10%
    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 7 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $351k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Steel Technologies’ 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