Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Clarence & Lilly Pickett Endowment

Its FY2018 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$51k
Granted FY2018
13
Grants FY2018
8
States reached
$17k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172018.

Religion$54kYouth Development$31kEducation$10kPublic Benefit$8kEmployment$3kInternational$3kArts & Culture$1kHuman Services$500
02FY2018 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2018

  • Under $10k11 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $32k
$2,500
Median grant
8
States reached
$707k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Earlham College School of Religion$17,000
Barclay CollegeKaleo Academy$15,000
Individual grant recipient$4,500
Star Community Church$3,762
Northridge Friends Church$3,000
Friends Committee on National Legislation Education Fund$2,955
Individual grant recipient$2,500
Earlham School of Religion$2,500
Mesquakie Friends Center$1,000
Campus Ministry Network$1,000
College Ave Friends Church$500
North Valley Friends Church$500
New Hope Community Center$500
02The need
03

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 (FY17–17, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Quaker Voluntary Service: $10k → 13%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

ID
OR
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
VA
KS
NC
DC
GA

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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

04

Where the work is directed

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

About 5% of Clarence & Lilly Pickett Endowment’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 5% of the giving stays in IA; read by stated purpose it is 1% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Clarence & Lilly Pickett Endowmentlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

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.

25%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$27k · 3 repeat orgs$82k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2018, 0 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
13

Total granted

$27k
$47k

Still filing today

0%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2018, 35% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $36k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18
EducationHuman ServicesOther

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

  • BC
    Barclay CollegeKaleo Academy
    2× · 2017–2018 · $18k
  • FC
    Friends Committee on National Legislation Education Fund
    2× · 2017–2018 · $8k
  • MF
    Mesquakie Friends Center
    2× · 2017–2018 · $2k

Funded once

  • PH
    Pendle Hillgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $13k · revenue +39%
  • QV
    Quaker Voluntary Service Inc
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue -46%
  • GC
    Guilford College Friend's Center
    one grant, 2017 · $3k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
05the grantee network

7 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 7 of the 26 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
4/7
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Barclay CollegeKaleo Academy — $17,500 · OtherBarclay CollegeKaleo AcademyEarlham College School of Religion — $17,000 · OtherEarlham College School of ReligionPendle Hill — $13,000 · OtherPendle HillFriends Committee on National Legislation Education Fund — $7,955 · OtherFriends Committee on National Legislation Education FundIndividual grant recipient — $4,500 · OtherStar Community Church — $3,762 · OtherGuilford College Friend's Center — $3,400 · OtherNORTHRIDGE FRIENDS — $3,000 · OtherEVANGELICAL FRIENDS CHURCH-MID AMERICA — $3,000 · Other+12 more — $16,800 · Other+12 moreQuaker Voluntary Service Inc — $10,000 · Human ServicesQuaker Vol…Earlham College Inc — $2,500 · EducationEarlham Co…GUILFORD COLLEGE — $2,500 · EducationGUILFORD C…GEORGE FOX UNIVERSITY — $2,500 · EducationGEORGE FOX…Wilmington College — $2,500 · EducationWilmington…
Other$89,917Human Services$10,000Education$10,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetPendle Hill — $13,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetEarlham College Inc — $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGEORGE FOX UNIVERSITY — $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWilmington College — $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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 Pendle Hill
  • Who funds Quaker Voluntary Service Inc
  • Who funds Earlham College Inc
  • Who funds GUILFORD COLLEGE
  • Who funds GEORGE FOX UNIVERSITY
  • Who funds Wilmington College
  • Who funds CAMPUS MINISTRY NETWORK INC

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.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 organization Clarence & Lilly Pickett Endowment 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 3%
  • George Fox University3% 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
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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 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

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Clarence & Lilly Pickett Endowment?

Find your warmest path to Clarence & Lilly Pickett Endowment 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 26 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2018, released 2018. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph