Skip to content

· Private foundation

C Lydia Frederick

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.

$93k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$21k
Largest
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Religion$206kHuman Services$131kArts & Culture$31kHealth$31kHousing & Shelter$31kMembership Benefit$16kPhilanthropy$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $40k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $54k
$9,319
Median grant
3
States reached
$2.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE CHURCH HOME$20,968
ST PAUL'S PARISH$18,638
EPISCOPAL CHURCH WOMEN$13,979
SEABURY- WESTERN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY$9,319
CHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATION$9,319
REVIVE CENTER FOR HOUSING AND HEALING$5,591
SHRINERS HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN$5,591
EASTERN STAR HOME$4,660
ILLINOIS MASONIC HOME$4,660
UNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO$466
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 (FY24–25, $22k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%ILLINOIS MASONIC HOME: $5k → 12%REVIVE CENTER FOR HOUSING AND HEALING: $6k → 14%ILLINOIS MASONIC HOME: $5k → 12%REVIVE CENTER FOR HOUSING AND HEALING: $6k → 14%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$448k · 18 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
0

Total granted

$448k
$0

Still filing today

39%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • CC
    CHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATION
    2× · 2024–2025 · $20k · revenue +6%
  • RC
    REVIVE CENTER FOR HOUSING AND HEALING
    2× · 2024–2025 · $12k · revenue +10%
  • IM
    ILLINOIS MASONIC HOME
    2× · 2024–2025 · $10k · revenue +319%

Funded once

    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
    04the grantee network

    7 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. 7 of the 18 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)
    1
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    7/7
    Grantees still filing
    4/7
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    EPISCOPAL CHURCH WOMEN: $76,457 · OtherEPISCOPAL CHURCH WOMENTHE CHURCH HOME: $69,968 · OtherTHE CHURCH HOMETHE CHURCH HOME: $44,718 · OtherTHE CHURCH HOMEST PAUL'S PARISH: $39,749 · OtherST PAUL'S PARISHCHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATION: $31,098 · OtherCHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATIONBEXLEY HALL SEABURY-WESTERN FEDERATION: $31,096 · OtherBEXLEY HALL SEABURY-WESTERN FEDERATIONCHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATION: $19,874 · OtherSEABURY WESTERN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $19,874 · OtherREVIVE CENTER FOR HOUSING AND HEALING: $18,659 · OtherSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $18,659 · OtherEASTERN STAR HOME AT MACON: $15,549 · OtherILLINOIS MASONIC HOME: $15,549 · Other+1 more: $1,555 · OtherTHE SHRINERS' HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN: $11,924 · HealthEASTERN STAR HOME OF MACON: $9,938 · HealthREVIVE CENTER FOR HOUSING AND HEALING: $11,924 · Human ServicesILLINOIS MASONIC HOME: $9,938 · Human ServicesUNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO INC: $994 · Philanthropy
    Other$402,805Health$21,862Human Services$21,862Philanthropy$994

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

    25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE CHURCH HOME: $44,718 over 2y, 6.4% of budgetCHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATION: $19,874 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHE SHRINERS' HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN: $11,924 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetREVIVE CENTER FOR HOUSING AND HEALING: $11,924 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetILLINOIS MASONIC HOME: $9,938 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetEASTERN STAR HOME OF MACON: $9,938 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO INC: $994 over 2y, 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 THE CHURCH HOME ↗
    • Who funds CHILDREN'S CARE FOUNDATION ↗
    • Who funds THE SHRINERS' HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN ↗
    • Who funds REVIVE CENTER FOR HOUSING AND HEALING ↗
    • Who funds ILLINOIS MASONIC HOME ↗
    • Who funds EASTERN STAR HOME OF MACON ↗
    • Who funds UNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN CHICAGO INC ↗

    How much its grantees rely on government

    Each dot is one organization C Lydia Frederick funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from C Lydia Frederick. Bigger dots raise more.

    2025
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
    • The Shriners' Hospital for Children: 5% of 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.

    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 18 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 C Lydia Frederick’s filings →

    More from the funding graph