Skip to content

· Public charity

Tum Tum Tree Foundation

To provide support to alabama children with chronic life-threatening or certain life-altering conditions by raising and providing funds to other nonprofit organizations.

$1.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$200k
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$7.6MPhilanthropy$17kEmployment$10k
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 17 grants below total $1,165,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,205,002 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $40,002 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $125k
  • $50k–250k11 grants · $1.0M
$55,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$479k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ALABAMA CENTER FOR CHILDHOOD CANCER AND BLOOD DISORDERS$200,000
MAGIC MOMENTS$175,000
THE RED BARN FOUNDATION$160,000
MITCHELL'S PLACE$130,000
CHIPS$55,000
SPECIAL EQUESTRIANS$55,000
LIBBY'S FRIENDS$55,000
CAMP SMILE A MILE$55,000
AMBUCS$55,000
SIGHT SAVERS AMERICA INC$50,000
SERVICE DOGS OF ALABAMA$50,000
THE BELL CENTER$30,000
RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF ALABAMA$30,000
LULU STRONG FOUNDATION$25,000
ANGEL PILLOWCASES INC$20,000
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 (FY19–25, $195k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SPECIAL EQUESTRIANS: $55k → 7%SPECIAL EQUESTRIANS: $50k → 7%SPECIAL EQUESTRIANS: $40k → 7%SPECIAL EQUESTRIANS: $20k → 7%SPECIAL EQUESTRIANS INC: $10k → 7%SPECIAL EQUESTRIANS: $10k → 7%SPECIAL EQUESTRIANS: $10k → 7%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$7.6M · 17 repeat orgs$74k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +91% since the first grant, against -1% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
3

Total granted

$7.6M
$29k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+91%
-1%

Still filing today

94%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $45k 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
HealthHuman ServicesPhilanthropyAnimalsEmploymentScience & TechOther
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

  • MM
    MAGIC MOMENTS
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.9M · revenue +94% · 28% of their budget
  • TC
    The Children's Hospital of Alabama
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.8M · revenue +27%
  • TR
    THE RED BARN
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +91%

Funded once

  • TP
    TIPPING POINT COMMUNITY
    one grant, 2019 · $17k · revenue -1%
  • JV
    JONES VALLEY URBAN FARM
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue -39%
  • TU
    THE UAB RESEARCH FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +17%
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
Alabama Partnership for Children

To work in partnership with families and organizations to ensure that all alabama children (birth to five) get everything they need to develop to their fullest potential.

Education
2
Tum Tum Tree Foundation

To provide support to alabama children with chronic life-threatening or certain life-altering conditions by raising and providing funds to other nonprofit organizations.

Health
3
Accord Child Care Services Inc

To provide family and child-centered applied behavior analysis (aba) therapy for children with autism and other related disorders. we work with families to provide aba therapy in the home, community, at our support center, and (in special…

—
4
Nami Alabama Inc

Encourage and enhance advocacy and family support services on behalf of individuals suffering from mental illness.

Health
5
Alabama Healthcare Hall of Fame
Arts & Culture
6
Alabama Autism Assistance Program

To provide treatment, therapy and scholarships for behavioral and biomedical interventions to children with autism and their families.

Health
7
Voices for Alabama's Children

Our mission is to speak for the well-being of Alabama's children through research, public awareness, and advocacy.

Arts & Culture
8
Easter Seals East Georgia Inc

Easter Seals East Georgia's mission is to provide exceptional services to ensure that people with disabilities and barriers to employment maximize their potential for employment and independence and broaden their opportunities for full…

Human Services
9
Alexander Leigh Center for Autism

To provide an environment where children on the autistic spectrum can develop their potential academically, emotionally, socially, communicatively, physically and gain functional independence using programs and methods that are selected…

Education
10
Wheelchairs 4 Kids Inc

Wheelchairs 4 Kids is dedicated to improving the lives of children with physical disabilities. We provide wheelchairs, home and vehicle modifications as well as other assistive or therapeutic equipment at no charge to the families.

Human Services
11
Accessible Aba Inc

Our mission is to help children with autism and thier families reach their full potential by providing access to vital strategies of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) to those who cant (or prefer not to) access them through traditional…

—
12
Alabama Regional Medical Services

To provide quality healthcare and related services to all communities, including the underserved and homeless persons, regardless of language, culture, or financial barriers

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Service Dogs Alabama Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Lulu 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

22 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. 22 of the 23 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
22/22
Grantees still filing
18/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MAGIC MOMENTS: $1,851,000 · HealthMAGIC MOMENTSThe Children's Hospital of Alabama: $1,771,700 · HealthThe Children's Hospital of AlabamaTHE RED BARN: $1,052,750 · HealthTHE RED BARNMITCHELL'S PLACE INC: $898,000 · HealthMITCHELL'S PLACE INCANGEL PILLOWCASES INC: $270,000 · HealthSIGHT SAVERS OF AMERICA INC: $225,000 · Health+4 more: $385,000 · Health+4 moreUNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM: $405,422 · OtherUNIVERSIT…NATIONAL AMBUCS INC: $163,740 · OtherNATIONAL …RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE ALABAMA INC: $65,000 · OtherRONALD MC…+3 more: $32,400 · OtherSpecial Equestrians Inc: $195,000 · Human ServicesKID ONE TRANSPORT SYSTEM INC: $35,000 · Human ServicesSERVICE DOGS ALABAMA INC: $225,000 · AnimalsTHE LULU FOUNDATION: $25,000 · PhilanthropyTIPPING POINT COMMUNITY: $16,500 · PhilanthropyJONES VALLEY URBAN FARM: $10,000 · EmploymentHUDSON-ALPHA INSTITUTE FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY: $10,000 · Science & Tech
Health$6,453,450Other$666,562Human Services$230,000Animals$225,000Philanthropy$41,500Employment$10,000Science & Tech$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMAGIC MOMENTS: $1,851,000 over 9y, 28% of budgetThe Children's Hospital of Alabama: $1,771,700 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetTHE RED BARN: $1,052,750 over 9y, 15% of budgetMITCHELL'S PLACE INC: $898,000 over 9y, 3.7% of budgetANGEL PILLOWCASES INC: $270,000 over 9y, 49% of budgetSERVICE DOGS ALABAMA INC: $225,000 over 7y, 7.4% of budgetSIGHT SAVERS OF AMERICA INC: $225,000 over 7y, 1.1% of budgetSpecial Equestrians Inc: $195,000 over 7y, 14% of budgetSMILE-A-MILE: $185,000 over 6y, 2.7% of budgetNATIONAL AMBUCS INC: $163,740 over 5y, 31% of budgetLibbys Friends: $135,000 over 4y, 11% of budgetRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE ALABAMA INC: $65,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetTHE BELL CENTER FOR EARLY INTERVENTION PROGRAMS: $55,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetKID ONE TRANSPORT SYSTEM INC: $35,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetTHE LULU FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetMORE THAN 4 ATHLETICS: $20,000 over 2y, 91% of budgetTIPPING POINT COMMUNITY: $16,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHRISTOPHER KIDS: $10,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetGLENWOOD INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJONES VALLEY URBAN FARM: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE UAB RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $2,400 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 MAGIC MOMENTS ↗
  • Who funds The Children's Hospital of Alabama ↗
  • Who funds THE RED BARN ↗
  • Who funds MITCHELL'S PLACE INC ↗
  • Who funds ANGEL PILLOWCASES INC ↗
  • Who funds SERVICE DOGS ALABAMA INC ↗
  • Who funds SIGHT SAVERS OF AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds Special Equestrians Inc ↗
  • Who funds SMILE-A-MILE ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL AMBUCS INC ↗
  • Who funds Libbys Friends ↗
  • Who funds RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE ALABAMA INC ↗
  • Who funds THE BELL CENTER FOR EARLY INTERVENTION PROGRAMS ↗
  • Who funds KID ONE TRANSPORT SYSTEM INC ↗
  • Who funds THE LULU FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MORE THAN 4 ATHLETICS ↗
  • Who funds TIPPING POINT COMMUNITY ↗
  • Who funds CHRISTOPHER KIDS ↗
  • Who funds GLENWOOD INC ↗
  • Who funds JONES VALLEY URBAN FARM ↗
  • Who funds HUDSON-ALPHA INSTITUTE FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY ↗
  • Who funds THE UAB RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗

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 Daniel Foundation of AlabamaAL27.7× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Daniel Foundation of Alabama · The Community Foundation of Greater Birmingham · Alabama Power Foundation Inc · Hill Crest Foundation Inc · Susan Mott Webb Charitable Trust · Protective Life Foundation · Robert R Meyer Foundation · Walker Area Community Foundation Inc · Orlean & Ralph W Beeson Fund · Quarterbacking Children's Health Foundation · Altecstyslinger Foundation · Nall-Whatley 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 Tum Tum Tree Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tum Tum Tree Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 23 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 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 Tum Tum Tree’s filings →

    More from the funding graph