Skip to content
Three Arts Scholarship Fund Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Three Arts Scholarship Fund Inc

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.

$273k
Granted FY2023
12
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$90k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Three Arts Scholarship Fund Inc’s FY2024 grant dollars went to The Greater Cincinnati Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2023, the last year Three Arts Scholarship Fund Inc named its own grantees at scale: 9 organizations, $273k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

6
’20
7
’21
12
’22
9
’23
0
’24

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Philanthropy$5.9MEducation$1.1M
02FY2023 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k6 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $101k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $155k
$16,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI$90,300
MIAMI UNIVERSITY$65,100
NORTHERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY$39,100
WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY$27,600
XAVIER UNIVERSITY$18,400
ART ACADEMY OF CINCINNATI$16,000
CEDARVILLE UNIVERSITY$4,600
THOMAS MORE UNIVERSITY$2,300
UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON$2,300
CENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITY$2,300
MT ST JOSEPH UNIVERSITY$2,300
ANTIOCH COLLEGE$2,300
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 (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%EARHLAM COLLEGE: $4k → 18%ANTIOCH COLLEGE: $4k → 9%MIAMI UNIVERSITY: $65k → 12%WILMINGTON COLLEGE: $8k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON: $16k → 14%MT ST JOSEPH UNIVERSITY: $8k → 16%THOMAS MORE UNIVERSITY: $7k → 11%ANTIOCH COLLEGE: $2k → 9%MIAMI UNIVERSITY: $53k → 12%WILMINGTON COLLEGE: $2k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON: $6k → 14%MT ST JOSEPH UNIVERSITY: $6k → 16%THOMAS MORE UNIVERSITY: $2k → 11%ANTIOCH COLLEGE: $2k → 9%MIAMI UNIVERSITY: $37k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON: $4k → 14%MT ST JOSEPH UNIVERSITY: $3k → 16%ANTIOCH COLLEGE: $1k → 9%MIAMI UNIVERSITY: $11k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON: $2k → 14%MT ST JOSEPH UNIVERSITY: $2k → 16%WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY: $41k → 9%XAVIER UNIVERSITY: $23k → 16%WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY: $35k → 9%XAVIER UNIVERSITY: $18k → 16%WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY: $28k → 9%XAVIER UNIVERSITY: $18k → 16%WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY: $24k → 9%XAVIER UNIVERSITY: $10k → 16%CENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITY: $3k → 9%GREATER CINCINNATI FOUNDATION: $5.9M → 16%CENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITY: $2k → 9%ART ACADEMY OF CINCINNATI: $16k → 16%WILBERFORCE UNIVERSITY: $2k → 9%ART ACADEMY OF CINCINNATI: $16k → 16%CEDARVILLE UNIVERSITY: $5k → 9%ART ACADEMY OF CINCINNATI: $15k → 16%CEDARVILLE UNIVERSITY: $5k → 9%ART ACADEMY OF CINCINNATI: $8k → 16%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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 13 repeat orgs$26k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2023, 1 since wound down. Read against FY2023, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
3

Total granted

$1.1M
$26k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+57%

Still filing today

62%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23
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

  • XU
    XAVIER UNIVERSITY
    4× · 2020–2023 · $70k · revenue +13%
  • AA
    ART ACADEMY OF CINCINNATI
    4× · 2020–2023 · $55k · revenue +13%
  • UO
    University of Dayton
    4× · 2020–2023 · $29k · revenue +27%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI
    one grant, 2020 · $20k
  • EC
    Earlham College Incgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $4k · revenue +57%
  • WU
    WILBERFORCE UNIVERSITY WILBERFORCE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2022 · $2k · revenue +25%
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
Capital University

Capital university transforms lives by empowering an inclusive community of learners through engaging academic, co-curricular, and professional experiences.

Education
2
Wilson College

Wilson college empowers students to be confident and critical thinkers, creative visionaries, effective communicators, honorable leaders, and agents of justice.

Education
3
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
4
Saint Xavier University

Saint xavier university, a catholic institution inspired by the heritage of the sisters of mercy, educates persons to search for truth, think critically, communicate effectively and serve wisely and compassionately in support of human…

Education
5
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
6
Calvin University

The mission of calvin university is to equip students to think deeply, to act justly, and to live wholeheartedly as christ's agents of renewal in the world.

Education
7
Otterbein University

Otterbein University is an inclusive community dedicated to educating the whole person in the context of humane values. Our mission is to prepare graduates to think deeply and broadly, to engage locally and globally, and to advance their…

Education
8
Tiffin University

Educate students by linking knowledge to professional practice.

Education
9
Union University

Union university provides christ-centered education that promotes excellence and character development in service to church and society.

Education
10
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…

—
11
Mount Marty University

Mount marty university, an academic community in the catholic benedictine liberal arts tradition, prepares students for a contemporary world of work, service to the human community, and personal growth. the institution is a private,…

Education
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Thomas More University Inc; the most unlike its peers is Central State University. 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

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 17 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)
11/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE GREATER CINCINNATI FOUNDATION: $5,876,378 · PhilanthropyTHE GREATER CINCINNATI FOUNDATIONUNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI: $384,100 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF …NORTHERN KENTUCKY UNIVERSITY: $175,900 · OtherNORTHERN KENTU…MIAMI UNIVERSITY: $166,300 · OtherMIAMI UNIVERSI…WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY: $128,000 · OtherWRIGHT STATE U…+1 more: $20,000 · OtherXAVIER UNIVERSITY: $69,800 · EducationART ACADEMY OF CINCINNATI: $55,000 · EducationUniversity of Dayton: $28,500 · EducationMOUNT ST JOSEPH UNIVERSITY: $19,300 · EducationWilmington College: $10,000 · EducationCedarville University: $9,800 · EducationTHOMAS MORE UNIVERSITY INC: $9,700 · EducationANTIOCH COLLEGE CORPORATION: $9,300 · Education+3 more: $11,300 · Education
Philanthropy$5,876,378Other$874,300Education$222,700

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 budgetTHE GREATER CINCINNATI FOUNDATION: $5,876,378 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetXAVIER UNIVERSITY: $69,800 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetART ACADEMY OF CINCINNATI: $55,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetUniversity of Dayton: $28,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMOUNT ST JOSEPH UNIVERSITY: $19,300 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWilmington College: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCedarville University: $9,800 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHOMAS MORE UNIVERSITY INC: $9,700 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetANTIOCH COLLEGE CORPORATION: $9,300 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITY: $5,300 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetEarlham College Inc: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWILBERFORCE UNIVERSITY WILBERFORCE UNIVERSITY: $2,000 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 THE GREATER CINCINNATI FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds XAVIER UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds ART ACADEMY OF CINCINNATI ↗
  • Who funds University of Dayton ↗
  • Who funds MOUNT ST JOSEPH UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Wilmington College ↗
  • Who funds Cedarville University ↗
  • Who funds THOMAS MORE UNIVERSITY INC ↗
  • Who funds ANTIOCH COLLEGE CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds CENTRAL STATE UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Earlham College Inc ↗
  • Who funds WILBERFORCE UNIVERSITY WILBERFORCE UNIVERSITY ↗

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.

Tr Uw Chas E Schell E…Thomas R Schiff Found…The Dayton FoundationJohnson Charitable Gi…Ge Aerospace Foundati…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Tr Uw Chas E Schell EducationOH13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tr Uw Chas E Schell Education · Thomas R Schiff Foundation · The Dayton Foundation · Johnson Charitable Gift Fund · Ge Aerospace Foundation · 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 Three Arts Scholarship Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Three Arts Scholarship Fund 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 17 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Three Arts Scholarship’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