Skip to content

· Private foundation

Arthur M & Ethel L Hylton Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$29k
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Arts & Culture$69kRecreation & Sports$51kHealth$27kEnvironment$26kHuman Services$17kCommunity Improvement$9kEducation$6kYouth Development$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,100
Median grant
1
States reached
$482k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Morris County Historical Society$5,000
Friends of Kaw Heritage$3,500
Live Well Morris County$2,500
City of Council Grove$2,500
Morris County Hospital Foundation$2,100
Morris County Care & Share$2,100
Council Grove Life Center$2,100
Council Grove Community Theatre$2,000
Community Mentoring Program$1,500
Council Grove Arts Council$1,500
Council Grove Public Library$1,250
Morris County 4-H$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
Historic Preservation Corporation$1,000
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 (FY24–24, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%Building Blocks Community Child Care: $1k → 11%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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$184k · 18 repeat orgs$42k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +20% since the first grant, against -24% for those funded once.

18 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
20

Total granted

$184k
$36k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
-24%

Still filing today

22%
15%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k 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
Recreation & SportsHealthArts & CultureHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • CG
    Council Grove Life Center Inc
    7× · 2017–2025 · $33k · revenue +20%
  • CO
    City of Council Grove Riverwalk Committee
    5× · 2019–2023 · $32k
  • MC
    MORRIS COUNTY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION
    6× · 2017–2025 · $27k · revenue -74%

Funded once

  • VO
    Voices of the Wind People
    one grant, 2023 · $8k
  • CG
    Council Grove Youth Wrestling
    one grant, 2024 · $4k
  • CG
    Council Grove Riverwalk Park Committee
    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
North Central Kansas Housing Opportunities Inc
Community Improvement
2
Hayslope Preservation Historic Fund

Public charity

—
3
Kansas Business Hall of Fame Inc
—
4
The Pioneer Bluffs Foundation Inc

To become a center for ranching heritage in the Flint Hills.

Arts & Culture
5
Neosho Memorial Hospital Foundation
—
6
Scott Hospital Foundation

To provide funding to Scott County Hospital, Scott City, Kansas through independent fundraising activities.

Health
7
Kansas Insurance & Financial Services Education Foundation
Education
8
Haskell County Historical Society Haskell County Historical Society

To restore and preserve historical structures and memorabilia

—
9
Council Grove Area Foundation

To serve Council Grove and the surrounding areas by creating an endowment dedicated to enriching the quality of life for present and future generations.

Philanthropy
10
The Cowley County Historical Society

The museum collects and preserves memorabilia of cowley county, kansas. the museum is open to the public during scheduled hours, and is staffed by a combination of volunteers and staff.

—
11
Scott County Historical Society Inc

Preservation study and collection of historical items

—
12
Community Enhancement Foundation of Plains

To combat economic and physical deterioration of Plains KS through charitable social welfare activities and economic development projects that encourage job development and population stability.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Morris County Hospital Foundation; the most unlike its peers is White Memorial Camp Management Group. 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

8 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. 8 of the 42 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)
8/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

City of Council Grove Riverwalk Committee: $32,000 · OtherCity of Council Grove Riverwalk CommitteeFRIENDS OF KAW HERITAGE INCORPORATED: $11,750 · OtherFRIENDS OF KAW HERITAGE INCORPORATEDIndividual grant recipient: $10,800 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCouncil Grove Arts Council: $8,968 · OtherCouncil Grove Arts CouncilMORRIS COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INCORPORATED: $8,750 · OtherMORRIS COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INCORPORATEDIndividual grant recipient: $7,750 · OtherVoices of the Wind People: $7,500 · OtherCouncil Grove Public Library: $5,350 · Other+29 more: $61,250 · Other+29 moreCouncil Grove Life Center Inc: $33,100 · Recreation & SportsCouncil Grove Li…MORRIS COUNTY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $27,100 · HealthMORRIS COUNTY…Kansas State Historical Society Inc: $10,000 · Arts & CultureHISTORIC PRESERVATION CORPORATION: $1,000 · EducationBuilding Blocks Community Child Care Inc: $1,000 · Human Services
Other$154,118Recreation & Sports$33,100Health$27,100Arts & Culture$10,000Education$1,000Human Services$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCouncil Grove Life Center Inc: $33,100 over 7y, 4.0% of budgetMORRIS COUNTY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $27,100 over 6y, 2.9% of budgetKansas State Historical Society Inc: $10,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetSymphony in the Flint Hills Inc: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCASA OF THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT INC: $1,850 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetHISTORIC PRESERVATION CORPORATION: $1,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetBuilding Blocks Community Child Care Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWHITE MEMORIAL CAMP MANAGEMENT GROUP: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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 Council Grove Life Center Inc ↗
  • Who funds MORRIS COUNTY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Kansas State Historical Society Inc ↗
  • Who funds Symphony in the Flint Hills Inc ↗
  • Who funds CASA OF THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT INC ↗
  • Who funds HISTORIC PRESERVATION CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds Building Blocks Community Child Care Inc ↗
  • Who funds WHITE MEMORIAL CAMP MANAGEMENT GROUP ↗

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.

Oscar & Ina Nystrom FoundationKS28.5× affinity11 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Oscar & Ina Nystrom Foundation · Bill B Young Foundation · John E Trembly Foundation · Council Grove Area Foundation · 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 Arthur M & Ethel L Hylton Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Arthur M & Ethel L Hylton Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’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
    1report 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 Arthur M & Ethel L Hylton Trust?

    Find your warmest path to Arthur M & Ethel L Hylton Trust 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 42 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 Arthur M & Ethel L Hylton’s filings →

    More from the funding graph