Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Yokefellow 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.

$50k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$10k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$61kReligion$54kYouth Development$20kInternational$17kHuman Services$7kHousing & Shelter$2kEducation$2kPhilanthropy$100
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $30k
$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$84k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH$10,000
MAYO CLINIC$10,000
THE VILLAGE CHURCH$10,000
MAKE A WISH$5,000
WESTMINSTER SEMINARY OF CALIFORNIA$5,000
SMILE TRAIN INC$5,000
RADY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION$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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–18, $50) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CHEERFUL GIVERS: $50 → 14%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
MA
CA
WV
VA
TN
DC
TX
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 57% of The Yokefellow Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 42% of the giving stays in MN; by stated purpose, 29%.

The Yokefellow Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$128k · 15 repeat orgs$15k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +64% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
3

Total granted

$128k
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+64%
0%

Still filing today

53%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
PhilanthropyHealthInternationalEducationHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesOther
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

  • WC
    WATOTO CHILD CARE MINISTRY INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $8k · revenue +1%
  • SMILE TRAIN INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $7k · revenue +22%
  • ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $6k · revenue +145%

Funded once

  • BB
    BETHLEHEM BAPTIST CHURCH
    one grant, 2021 · $8k
  • VS
    VINCARE SERVICES OF AUSTIN FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $2k · revenue 0%
  • CG
    CHEERFUL GIVERS
    one grant, 2018 · $50
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
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
2
St Joseph's Hospital of Tampa Foundation Inc

St. joseph's hospitals foundation secures, manages and stewards philanthropic support to benefit the health care mission of st. joseph's hospital, st. joseph's women's hospital, st. joseph's children's hospital of tampa, st. joseph's…

Health
3
Children's Hospital Corporation

Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service

Health
4
The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia

The children's hospital of philadelphia, the oldest hospital in the united states dedicated exclusively to pediatrics, strives to be the world leader in the advancement of health care for children by integrating excellent patient care,…

Health
5
Children's Heartlink

We save children's lives by transforming pediatric heart care in underserved parts of the world.

—
6
Cook Children's Medical Center

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.

Health
7
St Marys Healthcare System for Children Inc

To serve as the sole member of the various health care and supporting organizations that comprise st. mary's healthcare system for children

Health
8
Children's Physicians

Children's physicians delivers the highest quality pediatric primary care while supporting education and research.

Health
9
Cook Children's Medical Center - Prosper

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.

Health
10
Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital Inc

Mission: johns hopkins all children's hospital (all children's), a member of johns hopkins medicine, strives to provide the highest quality care to improve the health of our entire community through innovation, collaboration, service…

Health
11
St Marys Hospital for Children Inc

St. mary's hospital for children ("smh"), the flagship of st. mary's healthcare system for children, is committed to improving the health and quality of life for children and young adults with special healthcare needs. a nationally…

Health
12
Cook Children's Health Plan

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease, and injury.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is St Jude Children's Research Hospital Inc; the most unlike its peers is Vincare Services of Austin Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

12 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. 12 of the 20 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VILLAGE COMMUNITY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $26,250 · OtherVILLAGE COMMUNITY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCHWESTMINSTER SEMINARY OF CALIFORNIA: $20,000 · OtherWESTMINSTER SEMINARY OF CALIFORNIAURBAN VENTURES FAMILY PROGRAMS: $20,000 · OtherURBAN VENTURES FAMILY PROGRAMSST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH: $15,000 · OtherST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCHBETHLEHEM BAPTIST CHURCH: $7,500 · OtherBETHLEHEM BAPTIST CHURCHSMILE TRAIN INC: $7,000 · OtherSMILE TRAIN INCMAKE A WISH: $5,900 · OtherMAKE A WISH+3 more: $5,000 · OtherMAYO CLINIC: $18,500 · HealthMAYO CLINICSMILE NETWORK INTERNATIONAL: $8,500 · HealthSMILE NETWORK INTERNATI…ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $6,000 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESE…THE HOPE CHEST FOR BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION: $6,000 · PhilanthropyRADY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION SAN DIEGO: $5,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $100 · PhilanthropyWATOTO CHILD CARE MINISTRY INC: $8,000 · InternationalBOSTON TRINITY ACADEMY INC: $1,500 · EducationJEREMIAH PROGRAM: $750 · Housing & ShelterCHEERFUL GIVERS: $50 · Human Services
Other$106,650Health$33,000Philanthropy$11,100International$8,000Education$1,500Housing & Shelter$750Human Services$50

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 budgetMAYO CLINIC: $18,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSMILE NETWORK INTERNATIONAL: $8,500 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetWATOTO CHILD CARE MINISTRY INC: $8,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetSMILE TRAIN INC: $7,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $6,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HOPE CHEST FOR BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetRADY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION SAN DIEGO: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVINCARE SERVICES OF AUSTIN FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBOSTON TRINITY ACADEMY INC: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetJEREMIAH PROGRAM: $750 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMARINE TOYS FOR TOTS FOUNDATION: $100 over 2y, 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 MAYO CLINIC ↗
  • Who funds SMILE NETWORK INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds WATOTO CHILD CARE MINISTRY INC ↗
  • Who funds SMILE TRAIN INC ↗
  • Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
  • Who funds THE HOPE CHEST FOR BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds RADY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION SAN DIEGO ↗
  • Who funds VINCARE SERVICES OF AUSTIN FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BOSTON TRINITY ACADEMY INC ↗
  • Who funds JEREMIAH PROGRAM ↗
  • Who funds MARINE TOYS FOR TOTS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CHEERFUL GIVERS ↗

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.

The Blackbaud Giving FundSC11.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Blackbaud Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Yokefellow Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Yokefellow Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%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
    2get 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 20 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 Yokefellow’s filings →

    More from the funding graph