· Private foundation
Bill and Ellen Cranwell Charitable Trust Inc
Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What it funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2018.
Where the money goes
Grants by size, and the largest recipients.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GRACE COVENANT PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH | $5,000 |
Does the money reach high-need areas?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–18) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 16%. 50% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
How this is measured
How this is measured
0 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2018.
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 2018, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 0 of the 2 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.
Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Bill and Ellen Cranwell Charitable Trust Inc?
Find your warmest path to Bill and Ellen Cranwell Charitable Trust Inc 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.