Skip to content
Ttees the Edith W Mac Guire Char Tr at a glance

· Private foundation

Ttees the Edith W Mac Guire Char Tr

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.

$602k
Granted FY2025still arriving
50
Grants FY2025still arriving
15
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Civil Rights$714kAnimals$626kInternational$425kEnvironment$294kArts & Culture$177kHousing & Shelter$172kHealth$156kYouth Development$81kOther$0
02FY2025 · 50 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k33 grants · $224k
  • $10k–50k16 grants · $328k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$7,500
Median grant
15
States reached
$9.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER$50,000
NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN$40,000
CHENANGO COUNTY SPCA$30,000
WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL$25,000
WOMEN FOR AFGHAN WOMEN$25,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD$25,000
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE$25,000
TOO YOUNG TO WED$25,000
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES$20,000
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH$20,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS$15,000
Individual grant recipient$15,000
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE$15,000
SANIBEL HISTORICAL MUSEUM$12,500
CLINIC FOR REHABILITATION OF WILDLIFE$12,500
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 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 84% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%TOO YOUNG TO WED: $25k → 9%CHENANGO COUNTY SPCA: $30k → 12%WOMEN FOR AFGHAN WOMEN: $25k → 13%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE: $15k → 17%PURE THEATRE: $25k → 12%CLINIC FOR REHABILITATION OF WILDLIFE: $15k → 9%SANIBEL HISTORICAL MUSEUM: $15k → 11%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $76k → 18%TOO YOUNG TO WED: $20k → 9%CHENANGO COUNTY SPCA: $20k → 12%WOMEN FOR AFGHAN WOMEN: $20k → 13%CLINIC FOR REHABILITATION OF WILDLIFE: $15k → 9%SANIBEL HISTORICAL MUSEUM: $15k → 11%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $75k → 18%TOO YOUNG TO WED: $20k → 9%CHENANGO COUNTY SPCA: $20k → 12%WOMEN FOR AFGHAN WOMEN: $15k → 13%DING DARLING WILDLIFE: $15k → 11%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $50k → 18%TOO YOUNG TO WED: $15k → 9%DING DARLING WILDLIFE: $15k → 11%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $45k → 18%SOUTHERN PEVERTY LAW CENTER: $37k → 18%SOUTHERN PEVERTY LAW CENTER: $35k → 18%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $33k → 18%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $30k → 18%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $30k → 18%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $25k → 17%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $20k → 17%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $20k → 17%NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN: $40k → 14%NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN: $27k → 14%NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN: $27k → 14%NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN: $25k → 14%NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN: $21k → 14%NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN: $20k → 14%NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $20k → 14%NATIONAL ORGINIZATION FOR WOMEN NOW: $20k → 14%WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL: $40k → 14%WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL: $25k → 14%DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE: $20k → 14%WOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL: $20k → 14%JERICHO PROJECT: $75k → 17%JERICHO PROJECT: $25k → 17%INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE: $25k → 17%INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE: $20k → 17%INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE: $20k → 17%AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES: $20k → 17%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
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
CA
UT
CO
NE
VA
MD
KS
TN
SC
DC
OK
AL
GA
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.8M · 75 repeat orgs$112k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +38% since the first grant, against +23% for those funded once.

75 repeat relationships: 49 still active in FY2025, 26 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

75
33

Total granted

$2.8M
$112k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+38%
+23%

Still filing today

64%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
AnimalsEnvironmentInternationalArts & CultureFood & NutritionHealthOther
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

  • SP
    SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $410k · revenue +10%
  • JP
    JERICHO PROJECT
    9× · 2017–2025 · $112k · revenue +350%
  • IR
    International Rescue Committee INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $90k · revenue +38%

Funded once

  • PT
    Pure Theatre
    one grant, 2024 · $25k · revenue +10%
  • IC
    INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN FOR TIBETgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue +48%
  • IC
    INTERNATIONAL CONSERVATION CAUCUS F
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
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
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
2
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
3
World Animal Protection

World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…

Animals
4
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
5
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
6
Humane World Action Fund

To pass animal protection laws, educate the public, and support humane candidates for office.

Animals
7
Wildlife Alliance Inc

Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…

Animals
8
Panthera Corporation

Panthera's mission is the conservation of the world's 40 wild cat species, many of which are endangered or threatened. panthera develops, implements and oversees wild cat conservation strategies on a global scale.

Animals
9
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
10
Wildlife Conservation Society

The wildlife conservation society (wcs) saves wildlife and wild places worldwide through science, conservation action, education, and inspiring people to value nature.

Animals
11
American Wild Horse Preservation Campaign

The american wild horse campaign is the nation's leading conservation organization dedicated to preserving the freedom and habitat of wild horses and burros. through its initiatives in advocacy, conservation, land preservation, and legal…

Animals
12
Northern Jaguar Project

The mission of the northern jaguar project is to preserve and recover the world's northermost population of the jaguar, its unique natural habitat, and native wildlife under its protection as a flagship, keystone, and umbrella species.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Farm Sanctuary Inc; the most unlike its peers is Pure Theatre. 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

73 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 73 of the 109 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
71/73
Grantees still filing
54/73
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN: $118,000 · OtherNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMENWOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL: $100,000 · OtherWOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONALPLANNED PARENTHOOD: $80,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOODIndividual grant recipient: $55,000 · OtherSANIBEL HISTORICAL MUSEUM: $55,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $49,000 · OtherAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $56,500 · Other+59 more: $931,675 · Other+59 moreSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $410,100 · Crime & LegalSOUTHERN POVERT…CHENANGO COUNTY SPCA: $70,000 · AnimalsCHENANGO COUNTY…Defenders of Wildlife: $63,500 · AnimalsDefenders of Wi…CLINIC FOR THE REHABILITATION OF WILDLIFE INC: $62,000 · AnimalsCLINIC FOR THE …ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $40,500 · AnimalsANIMAL LEGAL DE…EAST COAST EXOTIC ANIMAL RESCUE INC: $33,500 · AnimalsEAST COAST EXOT…HUMANE FARMING ASSOCIATION: $30,500 · AnimalsHUMANE FARMING …FARM SANCTUARY INC: $29,000 · AnimalsFARM SANCTUARY …+12 more: $73,100 · Animals+12 moreInternational Rescue Committee INC: $90,000 · InternationalInternation…Women for Afghan Women Inc: $70,000 · InternationalWomen for A…HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $50,000 · InternationalHUMAN RIGHT…MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $49,500 · InternationalMEDECINS SA…THE CARTER CENTER INC: $40,000 · InternationalTHE CARTER …+4 more: $10,000 · InternationalNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $50,000 · EnvironmentNEW YORK RESTORATION PROJECT: $25,500 · EnvironmentFLYING CLOUD INSTITUTE INC: $21,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $15,500 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $15,000 · EnvironmentOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $11,500 · EnvironmentTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $11,000 · Environment+3 more: $3,350 · EnvironmentToo Young to Wed Inc: $80,000 · Arts & CultureTYPE MEDIA CENTER INC: $40,500 · Arts & CulturePure Theatre: $25,000 · Arts & CultureJERICHO PROJECT: $111,600 · Housing & Shelter
Other$1,445,175Crime & Legal$410,100Animals$402,100International$309,500Environment$152,850Arts & Culture$145,500Housing & Shelter$111,600

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 budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $410,100 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetJERICHO PROJECT: $111,600 over 9y, 1.1% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $90,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetToo Young to Wed Inc: $80,000 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetWomen for Afghan Women Inc: $70,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetCHENANGO COUNTY SPCA: $70,000 over 3y, 4.1% of budgetDefenders of Wildlife: $63,500 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetCLINIC FOR THE REHABILITATION OF WILDLIFE INC: $62,000 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $56,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $50,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $50,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $49,500 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $49,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN INC: $41,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetTYPE MEDIA CENTER INC: $40,500 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $40,500 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $40,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ACTORS' FUND OF AMERICA: $35,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCASTLETON RANCH HORSE RESCUE INC: $35,500 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetThe Fund for Animals Inc: $34,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetEAST COAST EXOTIC ANIMAL RESCUE INC: $33,500 over 7y, 1.4% of budgetGAY MEN'S HEALTH CRISIS INC: $31,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetNATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC: $31,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetHUMANE FARMING ASSOCIATION: $30,500 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetGOD'S LOVE WE DELIVER INC: $30,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCITY HARVEST INC: $30,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetMARA ELEPHANT PROJECT USA INC: $30,500 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetFARM SANCTUARY INC: $29,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL LGBTQ TASK FORCE: $27,000 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetNEW YORK RESTORATION PROJECT: $25,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetNEW MARLBOROUGH LAND TRUST INC: $25,100 over 9y, 13% of budgetPure Theatre: $25,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $22,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $21,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFLYING CLOUD INSTITUTE INC: $21,000 over 9y, 0.7% of budgetCOALITION FOR THE HOMELESS INC: $19,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $15,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTIGER PRESERVATION CENTER INC: $15,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetVOICES OF COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS & LEADERS (VOCAL-NY) INC: $12,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $11,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPRIDEROCK WILDLIFE REFUGE: $11,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $11,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGENTLE GIANTS DRAFT HORSE RESCUE SOCIETY LTD: $10,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWMHT EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetDING DARLING WILDLIFE SOCIETY INC: $9,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetIZZY'S LOVE EQUINE RESCUE INC: $8,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN FOR TIBET: $7,500 over 1y, 0.2% 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 SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds JERICHO PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
  • Who funds Too Young to Wed Inc ↗
  • Who funds Women for Afghan Women Inc ↗
  • Who funds CHENANGO COUNTY SPCA ↗
  • Who funds Defenders of Wildlife ↗
  • Who funds CLINIC FOR THE REHABILITATION OF WILDLIFE INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC ↗
  • Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN INC ↗
  • Who funds TYPE MEDIA CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds THE CARTER CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds THE ACTORS' FUND OF AMERICA ↗
  • Who funds CASTLETON RANCH HORSE RESCUE INC ↗
  • Who funds The Fund for Animals Inc ↗
  • Who funds EAST COAST EXOTIC ANIMAL RESCUE INC ↗
  • Who funds GAY MEN'S HEALTH CRISIS INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds HUMANE FARMING ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds GOD'S LOVE WE DELIVER INC ↗
  • Who funds CITY HARVEST INC ↗
  • Who funds MARA ELEPHANT PROJECT USA INC ↗
  • Who funds FARM SANCTUARY INC ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL LGBTQ TASK FORCE ↗

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.

Amg Charitable Gift F…Edwin D Marks Animal …PC Fund for Animals C…Joyce a Ward Foundati…Amica Companies Found…Paula Knickerbocker F…The Susan and Ford Sc…Grace and Li Yu Famil…Surendra and Karen Gu…Bradford Family Found…The Gerald B Shreiber…Farrell Family Founda…
Amg Charitable Gift FoundationCO22.3× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amg Charitable Gift Foundation · Edwin D Marks Animal Foundation · PC Fund for Animals Charitable Tr · Joyce a Ward Foundation · Amica Companies Foundation · Paula Knickerbocker Foundation Inc · The Susan and Ford Schumann Foundation · Grace and Li Yu Family Foundation · Surendra and Karen Gupta Arc Foundation · Bradford Family Foundation · The Gerald B Shreiber Foundation · Farrell Family 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 Ttees the Edith W Mac Guire Char Tr funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ttees the Edith W Mac Guire Char Tr. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Flying Cloud Institute Inc: 6% of income from government
  • Feed the Children Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Americares Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Food for the Poor Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
14report 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Ttees the Edith W Mac Guire Char Tr?

Find your warmest path to Ttees the Edith W Mac Guire Char Tr 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 109 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 Ttees the Edith W Mac Guire Char Tr’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