Skip to content

· Private foundation

Chapman Forestry Foundation Co Virgil Smith Cpa

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.

$29k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$17k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$152kEnvironment$139kHuman Services$13kFood & Nutrition$10kRecreation & Sports$6kReligion$5kYouth Development$3kPublic Benefit$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $17k
$2,500
Median grant
4
States reached
$2.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Donations from Part VIIIA$16,630
West Texas AM$2,500
Individual grant recipient$2,500
Arboretum Detroit$2,500
Trinity Chrisian School$2,000
Individual grant recipient$1,250
Cal Poly Pomona Arabian Horse Cente$1,000
Individual grant recipient$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 (FY18–20, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 17%. 42% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 17%OZONE HOUSE: $3k → 14%CANFIELD CONSCORTIUM: $1k → 21%CANFIELD CONSCORTIUM: $552 → 21%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.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$245k · 16 repeat orgs$92k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +20% since the first grant, against -22% for those funded once.

16 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
22

Total granted

$245k
$69k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
-22%

Still filing today

38%
9%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 21% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $23k 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
Human ServicesYouth DevelopmentFood & NutritionMembership BenefitEnvironmentOther
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

  • AD
    ARBORETUM DETROIT
    6× · 2020–2025 · $15k · revenue +16%
  • LM
    LUBBOCK MEMORIAL ARBORETUM INC
    6× · 2017–2024 · $14k · revenue +22%
  • SP
    SOUTH PLAINS FOOD BANK INC
    4× · 2018–2023 · $6k · revenue +20%

Funded once

  • CS
    California State Polytechnic Univer
    one grant, 2017 · $15k
  • CP
    CALPOLY POMONA PHILANTROPIC FOUNDA
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
  • CP
    CAL POLY POMONA - CFF TREE FUND
    one grant, 2023 · $4k
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
Rescue Mi Nature Now Inc

Rescue MI Nature Now, Inc. is a Michigan Nonprofit Organization committed to cultivating green zones within the communities and empowering neighborhoods through nature-centric educational programs. Through hands-on initiatives, we empower…

Environment
2
Winnett Food Forest
Food & Nutrition
3
Arborcrest Gardens
Science & Tech
4
Brush Park Senior Housing

Provide housing and services to low income senior adults

Human Services
5
Presbyterian Village - North

To provide wellness services to the community

Human Services
6
Plant Memorial Home
—
7
Hermann Park Conservancy

Hermann Park Conservancy is a citizens organization dedicated to the stewardship and improvement of Hermann Park - today and for generations to come.

Environment
8
East Texas Arboretum and Botanical Society Inc

Management and operation of the arboretum.

Environment
9
Canopy Bloomington

To grow and maintain Bloomington, IN's urban forest

Environment
10
Oakman Village Manor Senior Housing Development

Provide housing and services to low income senior adults

Housing & Shelter
11
Houston Parks Board

The Houston Parks Board mission is to expand, improve, and protect parks and greenspace in the Houston region.

Philanthropy
12
Shade Tree Ministries

To provide a supportive environment for ministry professionals including, rest & relaxation, spiritual renewal, and personal & marital restoration

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is High Plains Children's Home and Family Services Inc; the most unlike its peers is Canfield Consortium. 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, 2017–2025.

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. 8 of the 43 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)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: $60,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTACAL POLY POMONA: $52,000 · OtherCAL POLY POMONAUNIV OF MINNESOTA COLLEGE OF DESIGN: $20,000 · OtherUNIV OF MINNESOTA COLLEGE OF DESIGNDonations from Part VIIIA: $16,630 · OtherDonations from Part VIIIAIndividual grant recipient: $15,695 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherCalifornia State Polytechnic Univer: $15,000 · OtherLUBBOCK MEMORIAL ARBORETUM INC: $13,533 · OtherHIGH PLAINS CHILDREN'S HOME AND FAMILY SERVICES INC: $12,500 · OtherCAL POLY POMONA DEVELOPMENT DEPT: $11,000 · Other+27 more: $71,985 · Other+27 moreARBORETUM DETROIT: $15,000 · EnvironmentSOUTH PLAINS FOOD BANK INC: $6,000 · Food & NutritionHIGH PLAINS RETREAT CENTER: $5,000 · Membership BenefitOZONE HOUSE INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesCANFIELD CONSORTIUM: $1,785 · Human ServicesNORTH STAR REACH: $2,640 · Youth Development
Other$303,343Environment$15,000Food & Nutrition$6,000Membership Benefit$5,000Human Services$4,285Youth Development$2,640

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetARBORETUM DETROIT: $15,000 over 6y, 2.6% of budgetLUBBOCK MEMORIAL ARBORETUM INC: $13,533 over 6y, 18% of budgetHIGH PLAINS CHILDREN'S HOME AND FAMILY SERVICES INC: $12,500 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetSOUTH PLAINS FOOD BANK INC: $6,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHIGH PLAINS RETREAT CENTER: $5,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetNORTH STAR REACH: $2,640 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOZONE HOUSE INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% 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 ARBORETUM DETROIT ↗
  • Who funds LUBBOCK MEMORIAL ARBORETUM INC ↗
  • Who funds HIGH PLAINS CHILDREN'S HOME AND FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds SOUTH PLAINS FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds HIGH PLAINS RETREAT CENTER ↗
  • Who funds NORTH STAR REACH ↗
  • Who funds OZONE HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds CANFIELD CONSORTIUM ↗

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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.1× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Chapman Forestry Foundation Co Virgil Smith Cpa funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Chapman Forestry Foundation Co Virgil Smith Cpa. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 Chapman Forestry Foundation Co Virgil Smith Cpa?

    Find your warmest path to Chapman Forestry Foundation Co Virgil Smith Cpa 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 43 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 Chapman Forestry Foundation Co Virgil Smith Cpa’s filings →

    More from the funding graph