Skip to content

· Private foundation

Campbell Family Charitable Trust

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.

$33k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
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, FY2019 to 2025.

Human Services$156kArts & Culture$124kYouth Development$79kEducation$24kPhilanthropy$20kFood & Nutrition$1kInternational$1kReligion$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$836k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BONG HISTORICAL CENTER$25,000
NORTHERN STAR SCOUTING$2,500
SUPERIOR SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL$2,000
SUPERIOR PUBLIC LIBRARY$1,000
ST LOUIS RIVER QUEST$1,000
NORTHWESTERN TIGERS ED FOUNDATION$500
CATHEDRAL SCHOOL$500
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 (FY20–23, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%WOMENS CARE CENTER DULUTH INC: $1k → 15%WOMENS CARE CENTER DULUTH INC: $1k → 15%WOMENS CARE CENTER DULUTH INC: $500 → 15%THE DAMIANO CENTER: $1k → 15%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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$377k · 9 repeat orgs$28k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
10

Total granted

$377k
$24k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+10%
+116%

Still filing today

56%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesArts & CultureEducationOther
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

  • LW
    LUCIUS WOODS PERFORMING ARTS CENTER INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $9k · revenue +14%
  • NT
    NORTHWOOD TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2019–2023 · $5k · revenue +92%
  • WC
    WOMEN'S CARE CENTER DULUTH INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $3k · revenue +10%

Funded once

  • SP
    SUPERIOR PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $10k
  • LW
    LUCUIS WOODS PERFORMING ARTS CENTER
    one grant, 2019 · $3k
  • SD
    SCHOOL DISTRICT OF SUPERIORgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue +157%
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
Lake Superior College Foundation Inc

Provide financial support to promote the educational, cultural, scientific, and charitable activities of lake superior college duluth, mn.

—
2
North Dakota Natural Resources Trust
—
3
Duluth-Superior Area Community Foundation

We unite people and resources, driving bold action to create lasting impact for a brighter tomorrow.

Philanthropy
4
Duluth Library Foundation

The duluth library foundation champions the duluth public library and works to increase its capacity to serve the region.

Education
5
Northwest Wisconsin Community Services Agency Inc

To improve the quality of life by providing resources and services within our communities.

Human Services
6
Northwest Minnesota Arts Council

Support and enhance the development of the arts in northwestern minnesota. facilitate and encourage the creation and appreciation of the arts.

Arts & Culture
7
Northland Foundation

The northland foundation supports northeastern minnesota people and communities working toward a future where everyone feels they belong and can thrive.

Philanthropy
8
Second Harvest North Central Food Bank

Engaging the community to end hunger

—
9
North Dakota Masonic Foundation
—
10
North Star Foundation
—
11
North Star Foundation
Philanthropy
12
North Star Foundation
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northern Star Council; the most unlike its peers is The Depot 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

10 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. 10 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
8/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RICHARD I BONG VETERANS HISTORICAL CENTER: $285,000 · OtherRICHARD I BONG VETERANS HISTORICAL CENTERBONG HISTORICAL CENTER: $50,000 · OtherBONG HISTORICAL CENTERTHE DEPOT FOUNDATION: $20,000 · Other+15 more: $33,750 · Other+15 moreLUCIUS WOODS PERFORMING ARTS CENTER INC: $9,000 · Arts & CultureWOMEN'S CARE CENTER DULUTH INC: $3,000 · Human ServicesDAMIANO OF DULUTH INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesSCHOOL DISTRICT OF SUPERIOR: $3,000 · EducationTHE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL: $1,000 · International
Other$388,750Arts & Culture$9,000Human Services$4,000Education$3,000International$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE DEPOT FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetLUCIUS WOODS PERFORMING ARTS CENTER INC: $9,000 over 2y, 5.5% of budgetNORTHWOOD TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetNORTHERN STAR COUNCIL: $3,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWOMEN'S CARE CENTER DULUTH INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetSCHOOL DISTRICT OF SUPERIOR: $3,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCENTER AGAINST SEXUAL AND DOMESTIC ABUSE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSecond Harvest Northland: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAMIANO OF DULUTH INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL: $1,000 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 THE DEPOT FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds LUCIUS WOODS PERFORMING ARTS CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTHWOOD TECHNICAL COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN STAR COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds WOMEN'S CARE CENTER DULUTH INC ↗
  • Who funds SCHOOL DISTRICT OF SUPERIOR ↗
  • Who funds CENTER AGAINST SEXUAL AND DOMESTIC ABUSE ↗
  • Who funds Second Harvest Northland ↗
  • Who funds DAMIANO OF DULUTH INC ↗
  • Who funds THE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL ↗

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.

Inter City Oil FoundationMN15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Inter City Oil Foundation · Smdc Medical Center · Minnesota Power Foundation · Duluth-Superior Area Community Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Campbell Family Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Campbell Family Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Campbell Family Charitable Trust?

    Find your warmest path to Campbell Family Charitable 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 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-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 Campbell Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph