Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Ten-Ten Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$220k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$70k
Largest
01What it funds
0184% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Crime & Legal$490kPhilanthropy$390kEducation$238kCommunity Improvement$200kEmployment$153kHuman Services$113kEnvironment$60kRecreation & Sports$50kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $80k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $130k
$20,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$569k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WOMEN'S EMPOWERMENT NETWORK$70,000
LEGAL AID OF WESTERN MISSOURI$60,000
UMKC FOUNDATION$30,000
WILDWOOD OUTDOOR EDUCATION$20,000
HARMONY PROJECT KC$20,000
MOUNT CARAMEL CEMETARY FUND$10,000
POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE OF KANSAS CITY$5,000
HARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK$5,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%TIDES FOUNDATION: $230k → 10%WILDWOOD OUTDOOR EDUCATION: $20k → 13%WOMEN'S EMPLOYMENT NETWORK: $75k → 15%TIDES FOUNDATION: $100k → 10%WILDWOOD OUTDOOR EDUCATION: $20k → 13%WOMEN'S EMPLOYMENT NETWORK: $70k → 15%WILDWOOD OUTDOOR EDUCATION: $20k → 13%SEE STATEMENT: $468k → 15%SEE STATEMENT: $364k → 15%HARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK: $5k → 15%LEGAL AID OF WESTERN MISSOURI: $60k → 15%KC POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE: $5k → 15%LEGAL AID OF WESTERN MISSOURI: $60k → 15%POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE OF KANSAS CITY: $5k → 15%LEGAL AID OF WESTERN MISSOURI: $60k → 15%KC POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE: $5k → 15%UMKC FOUNDATION: $30k → 15%UMKC FOUNDATION: $30k → 15%UMKC FOUNDATION: $30k → 15%SEE STATEMENT: $423k → 15%HARMONY KC: $20k → 15%HARMONY KC: $20k → 15%HARMONY PROJECT KC: $20k → 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.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 21 repeat orgs$413k to everyone else

21 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 17 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
30

Total granted

$1.3M
$323k

Still filing today

19%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 59% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $90k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’23’24’25
Crime & LegalEmploymentEducationEnvironmentYouth DevelopmentFood & 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

  • LA
    Legal Aid of Western Missouri Endowment
    3× · 2019–2021 · $180k
  • LA
    Legal Aid of Western Missouri
    3× · 2023–2025 · $180k · revenue +2%
  • WE
    WOMENS EMPLOYMENT NETWORK
    2× · 2023–2024 · $145k · revenue -11%

Funded once

  • GK
    Greater Kansas City Community Foundation
    one grant, 2021 · $60k
  • MR
    Mattie Rhodes Center
    one grant, 2019 · $40k
  • WO
    Wildwood Outdoor Education Center
    one grant, 2019 · $35k
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 56 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
4/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Legal Aid of Western Missouri Endowment: $180,000 · OtherLegal Aid of Western Missouri EndowmentHarmony Project KC: $120,000 · OtherHarmony Project KCLegal Aid of Western Missouri: $120,000 · OtherLegal Aid of Western MissouriWildwood Education Center: $70,000 · OtherWildwood Education CenterWOMEN'S EMPOWERMENT NETWORK: $70,000 · OtherWOMEN'S EMPOWERMENT NETWORKTides Foundation: $70,000 · OtherTides FoundationGreater Kansas City Community Foundation: $60,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $40,000 · OtherMattie Rhodes Center: $40,000 · Other+40 more: $423,825 · Other+40 moreTIDES FOUNDATION: $330,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATIONLegal Aid of Western Missouri: $180,000 · Crime & LegalLegal Aid …WOMENS EMPLOYMENT NETWORK: $145,000 · EmploymentUMKC FOUNDATION: $90,000 · EducationWildwood Outdoor Education Center: $60,000 · EnvironmentPOLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE OF KC INC: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentHARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK: $5,000 · Food & Nutrition
Other$1,193,825Philanthropy$330,000Crime & Legal$180,000Employment$145,000Education$90,000Environment$60,000Youth Development$5,000Food & Nutrition$5,000

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 budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $330,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLegal Aid of Western Missouri: $180,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetWOMENS EMPLOYMENT NETWORK: $145,000 over 2y, 6.5% of budgetUMKC FOUNDATION: $90,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWildwood Outdoor Education Center: $60,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetHARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK: $5,000 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 TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Legal Aid of Western Missouri ↗
  • Who funds WOMENS EMPLOYMENT NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds UMKC FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Wildwood Outdoor Education Center ↗
  • Who funds POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE OF KC 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.

Greater Kansas City Community FoundationMO13.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · 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 Ten-Ten Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Ten-Ten Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%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
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Ten-Ten Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Ten-Ten Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 56 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 Ten-Ten’s filings →

    More from the funding graph