Skip to content
Bill & Julia Van Domelen Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Bill & Julia Van Domelen Foundation

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.

$9.7M
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$5.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Health$34MPhilanthropy$12MReligion$2.6MAnimals$1.0MEducation$850kHuman Services$646kFood & Nutrition$366kRecreation & Sports$100k
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $300k
  • $250k+4 grants · $9.4M
$1,000,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$122M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HEALTHCARE NETWORK$5,000,000
BILL AND JULIA VAN DOMELEN FOUNDATION DONOR ADVISED FUND$1,900,000
NCH HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INC$1,500,000
NAPLES CHILDREN & EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC$1,000,000
GRACE PLACE FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES INC$200,000
GUADALUPE CENTER$100,000
THE IMMOKALEE FOUNDATION$25,000
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 (FY17–24, $1.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CATHOLIC FAMILY SERVICES: $70k → 12%CATHOLIC CHARITIES DIOCESE OF KALAMAZOO: $100k → 12%GRACE PLACE FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES: $260k → 10%GRACE PLACE FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES INC: $200k → 10%GRACE PLACE FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES: $200k → 10%GRACE PLACE FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES: $140k → 10%GUADALUPE CENTER: $100k → 10%GUADALUPE CENTER: $376k → 10%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.
$42M · 11 repeat orgs$9.9M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +73% since the first grant, against +40% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
6

Total granted

$42M
$8.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+73%
+40%

Still filing today

64%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.9M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesPhilanthropyFood & NutritionEducationAnimalsOther
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

  • NCH HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $16M · revenue ×152,034 · 68% of their budget
  • NC
    NAPLES CHILDREN FOUNDATION INC
    6× · 2018–2024 · $4.3M · revenue +73%
  • NH
    NEIGHBORHOOD HEALTH CLINIC INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $3.7M · revenue +214% · 35% of their budget

Funded once

  • DL
    DAVID LAWRENCE MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $5.0M · revenue +40%
  • CH
    CHS HEALTH CARE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $1.5M
  • NZ
    NAPLES ZOO INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $1.0M · revenue +52%
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
Pediatric Specialty Group Inc

Pediatric specialty group, inc. (d/b/a nicklaus children's pediatric specialists ("ncps")) is a physician-directed, multi-specialty pediatric group with a regional, national, and international presence in providing pediatric-centric care…

—
2
Lakeshore Community Health Care Inc

Lakeshore community health care provides access to comprehensive, integrated health care, regardless of ability to pay, eliminating health disparities among the underserved.

Health
3
Cook Children's Medical Center - Prosper

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.

Health
4
Cook Children's Health Plan

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease, and injury.

Health
5
Florida Community Health Centers Inc

Florida community health centers, inc. (fchc) is a federally qualified health center serving medically needy populations in south florida, with an emphasis on serving rural and farm worker communities.

—
6
Cook Children's Medical Center

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.

Health
7
Boys & Girls Club of Collier County Flor

To empower all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, responsible, caring citizens.

Youth Development
8
Charlotte Community Health Clinic Inc

Provide the highest quality, patient-centered health care services for low-income and other underserved individuals.

Health
9
The Children's Home Society of Florida

Children's home society of florida mission statement:building bridges to success for children

Human Services
10
Depelchin Children's Center

We strengthen the lives of children by enhancing their mental health and physical well being.

Human Services
11
Child Study Center

The child study center (csc) provides children with complex developmental and behavioral disabilities the highest quality diagnosis, treatment and education to help them achieve their full potential.

Education
12
Cook Children's Physician Network

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease, and injury.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Naples Children Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Guadalupe Center Inc. 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

13 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. 13 of the 19 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
12/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NCH HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INC: $15,823,447 · HealthNCH HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INCDAVID LAWRENCE MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INC: $5,000,000 · HealthDAVID LAWRENCE MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INCNEIGHBORHOOD HEALTH CLINIC INC: $3,680,704 · HealthNEIGHBORHOOD HEALTH CLINIC INCNeighborhood Health Clinics Inc: $2,628,000 · HealthNeighborhood Health Clinics IncBILL AND JULIA VAN DOMELEN FOUNDATION DONOR ADIVSED FUND: $6,070,000 · OtherBILL AND JULIA VAN DOMELEN FOUNDATION …HEALTHCARE NETWORK: $5,595,480 · OtherHEALTHCARE NETWORKKALAMAZOO GOSPEL MINISTRIES: $2,075,000 · OtherKALAMAZOO GOSPEL MINISTRIESBILL AND JULIA VAN DOMELEN FOUNDATION DONOR ADVISED FUND: $1,900,000 · OtherBILL AND JULIA VAN DOMELEN FOUNDATION …CHS HEALTH CARE FOUNDATION: $1,500,000 · OtherCHS HEALTH CARE FOUNDATION+1 more: $524,775 · OtherNAPLES CHILDREN FOUNDATION INC: $4,250,000 · PhilanthropyNAPLES CH…+1 more: $25,000 · PhilanthropyGRACE PLACE FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES INC: $800,000 · Human ServicesGuadalupe Center Inc: $476,000 · Human ServicesCATHOLIC FAMILY SERVICES: $170,000 · Human ServicesNAPLES ZOO INC: $1,000,000 · AnimalsKALAMAZOO LOAVES & FISHES INC: $365,651 · Food & NutritionPRETTY LAKE VACATION CAMP INC: $100,000 · Recreation & SportsBOOKS FOR COLLIER KIDS INC: $25,000 · Education
Health$27,132,151Other$17,665,255Philanthropy$4,275,000Human Services$1,446,000Animals$1,000,000Food & Nutrition$365,651Recreation & Sports$100,000Education$25,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNCH HEALTHCARE SYSTEM INC: $15,823,447 over 3y, 68% of budgetDAVID LAWRENCE MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INC: $5,000,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetNAPLES CHILDREN FOUNDATION INC: $4,250,000 over 6y, 3.2% of budgetNEIGHBORHOOD HEALTH CLINIC INC: $3,680,704 over 2y, 35% of budgetNeighborhood Health Clinics Inc: $2,628,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetNAPLES ZOO INC: $1,000,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetGRACE PLACE FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES INC: $800,000 over 4y, 3.7% of budgetGuadalupe Center Inc: $476,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetKALAMAZOO LOAVES & FISHES INC: $365,651 over 1y, 5.8% of budgetCATHOLIC FAMILY SERVICES: $170,000 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetPRETTY LAKE VACATION CAMP INC: $100,000 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetTHE IMMOKALEE FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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.

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.

Raymond James Charita…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Raymond James Charitable Endowment FundFL11.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Bill & Julia Van Domelen Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bill & Julia Van Domelen Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 60%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • David Lawrence Mental Health Center Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Guadalupe Center Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
6get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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 Bill & Julia Van Domelen Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Bill & Julia Van Domelen Foundation 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 19 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Bill & Julia Van Domelen’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