Skip to content
Charles M and Joan R Taylor Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Charles M and Joan R Taylor Foundation Inc

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.

$2.6M
Granted FY2024still arriving
43
Grants FY2024still arriving
10
States reached
$500k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$2.2MHealth$2.1MArts & Culture$1.6MEducation$1.4MAnimals$1.1MFood & Nutrition$1.1MReligion$877kRecreation & Sports$755kOther$0
02FY2024 · 43 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k22 grants · $530k
  • $50k–250k20 grants · $1.6M
  • $250k+1 grant · $500k
$35,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$17M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Frontier Nursing Service, Incorporated$500,000
CARE Elementary School, Inc.$150,000
University of Arkansas School for Medical Sciences Foundation$100,000
Arkansas Children's, Inc.$100,000
Emmanuel Episcopal Church$100,000
Arkansas Foodbank$100,000
Wings of Mercy, Inc.$100,000
Camp Aldersgate, Inc.$100,000
Canine Companions for Independence, Inc.$100,000
The Nature Conservancy in Kentucky$100,000
Conservancy of Southwest Florida, Inc.$100,000
University of Arkansas Foundation, Inc.$75,000
The CRUDEM Foundation, Inc.$50,000
Planned Parenthood Great Plains, Inc.$50,000
Petoskey-Harbor Springs Area Community Foundation$50,000
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 (FY17–21, $800k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 6% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%WINGS OF MERCY INC: $250k → 8%WINGS OF MERCY INC: $150k → 8%WINGS OF MERCY INC: $150k → 8%WINGS OF MERCY INC: $100k → 8%WINGS OF MERCY INC: $100k → 8%FRANCES A ALLEN SCHOOL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN: $10k → 17%FRANCIS A ALLEN SCHOOL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN: $10k → 17%FRANCIS A ALLEN SCHOOL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN: $10k → 17%FRANCES A ALLEN SCHOOL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN: $10k → 17%FRANCIS A ALLEN SCHOOL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN: $10k → 17%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 54% of Charles M and Joan R Taylor Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 73% of the giving stays in AR; by stated purpose, 56%.

Charles M and Joan R Taylor Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
$11M · 37 repeat orgs$752k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +34% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

37 repeat relationships: 27 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

37
5

Total granted

$11M
$222k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+34%
0%

Still filing today

78%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $530k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’24
EducationHealthHuman ServicesArts & CultureHousing & ShelterFood & NutritionOther
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

  • WO
    WINGS OF MERCY INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +92% · 38% of their budget
  • CC
    CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +76%
  • AF
    ARKANSAS FOODBANK
    6× · 2017–2024 · $870k · revenue +106%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS SCHOOL FOR MEDICAL SCIENCES
    one grant, 2021 · $100k
  • HA
    HISTORIC ARKANSAS MUSEUM
    one grant, 2017 · $100k
  • CC
    CHARLEVOIX CIRCLE OF THE ARTS
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
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
Land Conservancy of West Michigan

Our mission is conserving West Michigans ecologically critical land. We protect land by creating public nature preserves, providing support to communities and local governments in creating natural areas, and helping private landowners…

Environment
2
The Northern Michigan University Foundation

The nmu foundation will establish and foster relationships to generate resources that benefit the strategic goals of northern michigan university.

Education
3
The Food Bank of Northeast Arkansas

The food bank of northeast arkansas provides hunger relief to people in need in twelve counties in northeast arkansas by raising awareness, securing resources, and distributing food through a network of non-profit agencies and programs.

Human Services
4
Habitat for Humanity Mississippi Capital Area

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity mississippi capital area brings people together to build homes, communities and hope.

—
5
Arkansas Foundation for Medical Care Inc

To promote excellence in health care through evaluation and education

Health
6
Habitat for Humanity of Minnesota Inc

Habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, community, and hope. through advocacy, collaboration, and leadership, hfh-mn advances the work of minnesota's habitat for humanity affiliates to create and preserve affordable…

—
7
The Land Trust for Tennessee Inc

To conserve the unique character of tennessee's natural and historic landscapes and sites for future generations.

Environment
8
Opportunity Arkansas Foundation

Renewing the land of opportunity by simplifying government and solving generational problems for the next generation.

Philanthropy
9
Northwest Arkansas Land Trust

To preserve and enhance quality of life for all people in northwest arkansas through the permanent protection of land.

Environment
10
The Food Bank for Central & Northeast Missouri

The food bank for central & northeast missouri is a regional disaster and hunger relief network that acquires and distributes millions of meals each year to help neighbors get the food they need to thrive. (continued on schedule o)the…

Food & Nutrition
11
Hancock County Habitat for Humanity

Partnering with economically disadvantaged individuals and families. Hancock County Habitat For Humanity seeks to eliminate poverty housing and to make decent, affordable shelter a matter of conscience and action.

—
12
Conway Hospital Community Services

Conway hospital community services provides outpatient health care services to horry county and the surrounding community in conjunction with conway hospital, inc., a non-profit acute care hospital system.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Arkansas Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Kmac Museum. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

45 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 45 of the 60 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
44/45
Grantees still filing
31/45
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $600,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYTHE CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA: $350,000 · OtherTHE CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDAEmmanuel Episcopal Church: $350,000 · OtherEmmanuel Episcopal ChurchEPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF ARKANSAS EXECUTIVE COUNCIL: $225,000 · OtherUniversity of Arkansas School for Medical Sciences Foundation: $200,000 · OtherChrist Episcopal Church: $200,000 · OtherOLD STATE HOUSE MUSEUM: $200,000 · OtherCAMP ALDERSGATE INC: $720,000 · OtherCAMP ALDERSGATE INCCharlevoix County Community Foundation: $425,000 · OtherCharlevoix County Community FoundationCRUDEM FOUNDATION INC: $350,000 · OtherCRUDEM FOUNDATION INC+25 more: $1,482,000 · Other+25 moreWINGS OF MERCY INC: $1,050,000 · Human ServicesWINGS OF MERCY INCCANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC: $1,050,000 · Human ServicesCANINE COMPANIONS F…+2 more: $70,000 · Human ServicesCARE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL INC: $500,000 · EducationCARE ELEMEN…TRANSYLVANIA UNIVERSITY: $375,000 · EducationTRANSYLVANI…UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOUNDATION INC: $325,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY …+4 more: $80,000 · Education+4 moreTIP OF THE MITT WATERSHED COUNCIL: $750,000 · EnvironmentTIP OF THE…Little Traverse Conservancy Inc: $400,000 · EnvironmentLittle Tra…ARKANSAS EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORK FOUNDATION: $815,000 · Arts & CultureKMAC MUSEUM: $125,000 · Arts & Culture+2 more: $45,000 · Arts & CultureARKANSAS FOODBANK: $870,000 · Food & Nutrition+2 more: $50,000 · Food & NutritionFRONTIER NURSING SERVICE INCORPORATED: $525,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN: $100,000 · HealthARKANSAS CHILDREN'S INC: $100,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD GREAT PLAINS: $75,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD GREAT NORTHWEST HAWAII ALASKA INDIANA AND KENTUCKY: $75,000 · Health
Other$5,102,000Human Services$2,170,000Education$1,280,000Environment$1,150,000Arts & Culture$985,000Food & Nutrition$920,000Health$875,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWINGS OF MERCY INC: $1,050,000 over 7y, 38% of budgetCANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC: $1,050,000 over 7y, 0.6% of budgetARKANSAS FOODBANK: $870,000 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetARKANSAS EDUCATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS NETWORK FOUNDATION: $815,000 over 4y, 16% of budgetTIP OF THE MITT WATERSHED COUNCIL: $750,000 over 7y, 9.1% of budgetCAMP ALDERSGATE INC: $720,000 over 5y, 28% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $600,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetFRONTIER NURSING SERVICE INCORPORATED: $525,000 over 2y, 17% of budgetCARE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL INC: $500,000 over 7y, 10% of budgetCharlevoix County Community Foundation: $425,000 over 4y, 4.1% of budgetLittle Traverse Conservancy Inc: $400,000 over 3y, 4.4% of budgetTRANSYLVANIA UNIVERSITY: $375,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetTHE CONSERVANCY OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA: $350,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetCRUDEM FOUNDATION INC: $350,000 over 7y, 3.2% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOUNDATION INC: $325,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetKMAC MUSEUM: $125,000 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MICHIGAN: $100,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetARKANSAS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetARKANSAS CHILDREN'S INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD GREAT PLAINS: $75,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHE MANNA FOOD PROJECT INC DBA - THE MANNA FOOD PROJECT: $75,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetHabitat for Humanity of Collier County Inc: $75,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF CENTRAL ARKANSAS INC: $75,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetNORTHWEST MI HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $75,000 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD GREAT NORTHWEST HAWAII ALASKA INDIANA AND KENTUCKY: $75,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER OF THE DELAWARE VALLEY: $65,000 over 3y, 5.0% of budgetFRANCIS A ALLEN SCHOOL FOR: $60,000 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetCHARLEVOIX COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY: $50,000 over 2y, 4.7% of budgetLEXINGTON HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $50,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetFEED MY PEOPLE INC: $50,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetPETOSKEY-HARBOR SPRINGS AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCENTRAL ARKANSAS RESCUE EFFORT FOR ANIMALS INC: $50,000 over 2y, 6.3% of budgetCHALLENGE MOUNTAIN OF WALLOON HILLS INC: $35,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF MADISON AND CLARK COUNTIES: $25,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetARKANSAS HUNGER RELIEF ALLIANCE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY SCHOOL OF THE ARTS: $25,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetFLORIDA GULF COAST UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetST FRANCIS HOUSE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetBEREA COLLEGE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHARRY CHAPIN FOOD BANK OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLITERACY ACTION OF CENTRAL ARKANSAS INC: $20,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetARKANSAS MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHERN MICHIGAN EQUINE THERAPY: $10,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetDUNBAR COMMUNITY GARDEN: $10,000 over 1y, 19% 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 loosely connected circle, clustered around a few shared anchors.

Arkansas Community Fo…Charlevoix County Com…Petoskey-Harbor Sprin…Heart of Arkansas Uni…The Offield Family Fo…Oleson FoundationRoy and Christine Stu…Frey FoundationTriford FoundationWindgate Charitable F…Arvest FoundationGreat Lakes Energy Pe…
Arkansas Community Foundation IncAR27.7× affinity12 shared granteesties to 5 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arkansas Community Foundation Inc · Charlevoix County Community Foundation · Petoskey-Harbor Springs Area Community Foundation · Heart of Arkansas United Way · The Offield Family Foundation · Oleson Foundation · Roy and Christine Sturgis Charitable And · Frey Foundation · Triford Foundation · Windgate Charitable Foundation Inc · Arvest Foundation · Great Lakes Energy People Fund

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 Charles M and Joan R Taylor Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Charles M and Joan R Taylor Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 8%
  • Care Elementary School Inc: 8% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
6report 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Charles M and Joan R Taylor Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Charles M and Joan R Taylor Foundation 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.

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 60 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.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $2.4M of grant expense with no grantee named in the published copy. A private foundation itemizes every grant it makes, so a return carrying none has filed its list as an attachment that the public copy does not include. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Charles M and Joan R Taylor’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