Skip to content
The William D Squires Educational Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The William D Squires Educational Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$70k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$70k
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 2024.

Education$2.2M
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$70,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$10k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY$70,000
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 84% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $8k → 17%TRUMAN STATE UNIVERSITY: $6k → 28%UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-PLATTEVILLE: $6k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF FINDLAY: $18k → 9%WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY: $11k → 9%DENISON UNIVERSITY: $100k → 10%MIAMI UNIVERSITY: $9k → 12%BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY: $13k → 12%WALSH UNIVERSITY: $5k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON: $9k → 14%OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY: $6k → 15%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $300k → 18%OHIO UNIVERSITY: $20k → 22%UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA: $5k → 17%UNIVERSITY OF FINDLAY: $13k → 9%WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY: $9k → 9%MIAMI UNIVERSITY: $9k → 12%BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY: $11k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON: $9k → 14%OHIO NORTHERN UNIVERSITY: $6k → 15%THE UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO FOUNDATION: $100k → 18%OHIO UNIVERSITY: $13k → 22%UNIVERSITY OF FINDLAY: $12k → 9%WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY: $6k → 9%MIAMI UNIVERSITY: $9k → 12%BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY: $8k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON: $8k → 14%THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $100k → 18%OHIO UNIVERSITY: $10k → 22%UNIVERSITY OF FINDLAY: $12k → 9%BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY: $6k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO: $100k → 18%OHIO UNIVERSITY: $10k → 22%UNIVERSITY OF FINDLAY: $9k → 9%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $70k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO: $13k → 18%OHIO UNIVERSITY: $7k → 22%UNIVERSITY OF FINDLAY: $6k → 9%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $42k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO: $8k → 18%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $41k → 15%CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY: $7k → 17%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $39k → 15%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $36k → 15%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $30k → 15%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $29k → 15%OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $20k → 15%OTTERBEIN COLLEGE: $208k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
WI
MI
NY
WY
IN
OH
MO
KY
AZ
TN
AL
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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.1M · 43 repeat orgs$116k to everyone else

43 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 42 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

43
7

Total granted

$2.1M
$116k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
+44%

Still filing today

35%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • OS
    OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
    2× · 2022–2023 · $400k · revenue +8%
  • DU
    DENISON UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2017–2023 · $106k · revenue +39%
  • TU
    The University of Findlay
    7× · 2017–2023 · $75k · revenue +4%

Funded once

  • THE UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +35%
  • EM
    EASTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
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
Lehigh University

The university's goal in the coming decade is to advance learning through the integration of teaching, research and service to others. the core of this goal is to prepare graduates to engage with the world and lead lives of meaning. to do…

Education
2
University of New Haven

The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…

Education
3
Delaware Valley University

See schedule o.we are inspired by the ideals of our founder who, in 1896, emphasized respect for all people and ideas, who honored knowledge with practice, progress and the common good. our historical commitment to experiential learning…

—
4
Point Park University

Provides innovative education in a dynamic urban setting. dedicated to academic excellence and community engagement,we prepare students of diverse backgrounds with the knowledge, skill,and experience to lead meaningful lives as informed…

—
5
Trinity University

Trinity university is an independent co-educational university whose mission is excellence in the interrelated areas of teaching, research and services.

Education
6
DePauw University

Depauw university develops leaders the world needs through an uncommon commitment to the liberal arts. depauw's diverse and inclusive learning and living experience, distinctive in its rigorous intellectual engagement and its global and…

Education
7
Benedictine University

Benedictine University is an inclusive academic community dedicated to teaching and learning, scholarship and service, truth and justice, as inspired by the Catholic intellectual tradition, the social teaching of the Church, and the…

Education
8
Western New England University

Western new england university, a comprehensive private institution with a tradition of excellence in teaching and scholarship and a commitment to service, awards undergraduate, master's, and doctoral degrees in various departments from…

Education
9
Albright College

As a diverse community of learners, we cultivate integrity, curiosity, connection and resilience.

Education
10
California Lutheran University

The mission of the university is to educate leaders for a global society who are strong in character and judgment, confident in their identity and vocation, and committed to service and justice.

Education
11
Loyola University

Loyola University New Orleans, a Jesuit and Catholic institution of higher education, welcomes students of diverse backgrounds and prepares them to lead meaningful lives with and for others; to pursue truth, wisdom, and virtue; and to work…

Education
12
Marquette University

As a Catholic, Jesuit university our mission is to search for truth, discover shareknowledge, foster personal professional excellence, promote a life of faith and developleadership expressed in service to others. See Schedule O.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ohio Northern University; the most unlike its peers is Ohio State University 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

19 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. 19 of the 50 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
18/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY: $305,000 · OtherOHIO STATE UNIVERSITYOTTERBEIN COLLEGE: $209,500 · OtherOTTERBEIN COLLEGEUNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO: $130,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF TOLEDOUNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI: $121,500 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATIOHIO UNIVERSITY: $66,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF AKRON: $58,631 · OtherKENT STATE UNIVERSITY: $56,000 · OtherBOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · Other+24 more: $304,427 · Other+24 moreOHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $400,000 · EducationOHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATIONDENISON UNIVERSITY: $106,000 · EducationDENISON UNIVERSITYTHE UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO FOUNDATION: $100,000 · EducationTHE UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO FOUNDATIONThe University of Findlay: $75,056 · EducationThe University of FindlayUniversity of Dayton: $43,000 · Education+13 more: $171,500 · Education+13 more
Other$1,301,058Education$895,556

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetOHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $400,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetDENISON UNIVERSITY: $106,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetThe University of Findlay: $75,056 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Dayton: $43,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetBaldwin Wallace University: $22,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetWalsh University Inc: $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY: $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJohn Carroll University: $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCornell University: $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCAPITAL UNIVERSITY: $16,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCOLUMBUS COLLEGE OF ART & DESIGN: $16,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetOhio Northern University: $12,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetASHLAND UNIVERSITY: $9,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRochester Institute of Technology: $6,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetXAVIER UNIVERSITY: $6,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWASHINGTON UNIVERSITY: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLIPSCOMB UNIVERSITY: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOtterbein University: $1,500 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 OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds DENISON UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds The University of Findlay ↗
  • Who funds University of Dayton ↗
  • Who funds Baldwin Wallace University ↗
  • Who funds Walsh University Inc ↗
  • Who funds CASE WESTERN RESERVE UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds John Carroll University ↗
  • Who funds Cornell University ↗
  • Who funds CAPITAL UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds COLUMBUS COLLEGE OF ART & DESIGN ↗
  • Who funds Ohio Northern University ↗
  • Who funds ASHLAND UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Rochester Institute of Technology ↗

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.

Berry Marie D Fd H Pf…Ruth M Hughes Scholar…The Paul and Carol Da…The Ohio Foundation OfCommunity Foundations…Premier Bank Foundati…Columbus FoundationMorgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Berry Marie D Fd H PfdnOH13.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Berry Marie D Fd H Pfdn · Ruth M Hughes Scholarship Trust · The Paul and Carol David Foundation · The Ohio Foundation Of · Community Foundations Inc · Premier Bank Foundation · Columbus Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 William D Squires Educational Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The William D Squires Educational Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s 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 · 0–30%
    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 50 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 William D Squires Educational’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