Loading…
· Private foundation
CHARLES W FREES AND JEAN H FREES FOUNDATION
This foundation does not accept unsolicited requests — it funds preselected organizations.
$50k
Granted FY2025
7
Grants
2
Communities
$9k
Largest
01What you fund
01
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 50% of CHARLES W FREES AND JEAN H FREES FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2019
—
2020
—
2021
—
2022
—
2023
deaf
2024
—
2025
deaf
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2025 · 7 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
$7,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
- MIRIAM FOUNDATION$9,000
- PONY BIRD INC$8,000
- CENTER FOR HEARING & SPEECH$8,000
- CENTRAL INSTITUTE FOR THE DEAF$7,500
- ST JOSEPH INSTITUTE FOR THE DEAF$7,500
- VARIETY THE CHILDRENS CHARITY$7,000
- WILLIAM M BEDELL ACHIEVEMENT & RESOURCE$3,000
02The need
04
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
show:
Your human-services grants (FY23–25, $22k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 10%. 64% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
03Your edge
repeat funding
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
83%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$351k · 11 repeat orgs$73k to everyone else
11 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
11
6
Total granted
$351k
$66k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+27%
+28%
Still filing today
73%
17%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Human ServicesEducationHealthOther
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- MFMIRIAM FOUNDATION6× · 2018–2025 · $51k · revenue +27%
- PBPONY BIRD INC5× · 2018–2025 · $50k · revenue +190%
- CICENTRAL INSTITUTE FOR THE DEAF6× · 2019–2025 · $45k · revenue +1%
Funded once
- SESPECIAL EDUCATION ENRICHMENTone grant, 2019 · $22k
- PBPONY BIRD INCone grant, 2020 · $15k
- AMANNIE MALONE CHILDREN AND FAMILYone grant, 2021 · $10k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
04Your field
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
1
St Louis Life
Enable individuals with developmental disabilities to achieve the highest level of independent living and live a full and enriched life.
Housing & Shelter
2
Center On Deafness
Education and training of the deaf and hearing impaired.
—
3
St Louis Learning Disabilities
Children need hope, understanding, and compassion to learn and reach their potential. the st. louis learning disabilities association (lda) helps children by giving them the education and support necessary to be successful.
Human Services
4
Academy of St Louis
Provide special education to children with disabilities.
Education
5
St Louis Arc Inc
Services and supports for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
Human Services
6
The River School
Independent school offering programs for infants, toddlers, preschool, and elementary school aged children with and without hearing loss.
Education
7
Disability Rights Wisconsin Inc
Legal protection and advocacy to protect the rights of people with disabilities in wisconsin.
—
8
Center for Speech and Language Disorders
We change lives through accessible, affordable speech-language therapy and advocacy. we call this work communication justice.
Health
9
St Rita School for the Deaf
St. Rita School for the Deaf is a Catholic school, educating students of all faiths in a Christ-centered, barrier-free communication environment through individualized instruction, personal attention and direct communication.
—
10
Center for Hearing and Communication
Center for Hearing and Communication provides high-quality comprehensive services to empower people affected by hearing loss, deafness or listening challenges.
—
11
Center for Independence through Conductive Education Inc
To help children and young adults with disabilities achieve their highest level of indepedence in the home, school, comunity and workforce.
Education
12
Direct Center for Independence Inc
DIRECT Center for Independence, Inc. advocates voice, choice and independence for people with disabilities. Directs vision is universal access and opportunity for all people with disabilities.
Human Services
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is St Joseph Institute for the Deaf and the most unlike its peers is Miriam Foundation. 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
9 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$211,839Education$96,300Human Services$64,200Health$51,200
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds MIRIAM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PONY BIRD INC ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL INSTITUTE FOR THE DEAF ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR HEARING & SPEECH ↗
- Who funds RANKEN JORDAN HOME FOR CONVALESCENT ↗
- Who funds TREE HOUSE OF GREATER ST LOUIS ↗
- Who funds ST JOSEPH INSTITUTE FOR THE DEAF ↗
- Who funds WILLIAM M BEDELL ACHIEVEMENT & RESOURCE ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Pott FoundationWI20.3× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Pott Foundation · Employees of Community Fund · United Way of Greater St Louis Inc · Commerce Bancshares Foundation · St Louis Community Foundation Inc · St Louis Community Foundation · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organisation CHARLES W FREES AND JEAN H FREES FOUNDATION funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
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. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: SPECIAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
medium risk
~5 months of operating runway; revenue held over 7 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 431328026 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on SPECIAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 5 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue held over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 5% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Charles W Frees and Jean H Frees Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Charles W Frees and Jean H Frees Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines