Skip to content

· 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 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 2018.

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

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

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
Earlham School of Religion$2,500
Individual grant recipient$2,500
Campus Ministry Network$1,000
Mesquakie Friends Center$1,000
College Ave Friends Church$500
New Hope Community Center$500
North Valley Friends Church$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 (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 its 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
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.

Which US states its grants reach

ID
OR
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
VA
KS
NC
DC
GA
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 5% of Clarence & Lilly Pickett Endowment’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 5% of the giving stays in IA; by stated purpose, 1%.

Clarence & Lilly Pickett Endowmentlessmore 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.

25%of every dollar goes to organizations it has 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
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

  • 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
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
05the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 26 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
4/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and 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 grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's 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
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 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 ↗

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.

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

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 Clarence & Lilly Pickett Endowment funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Clarence & Lilly Pickett Endowment. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • George Fox University: 3% 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, 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 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 26 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 2018, released 2018. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Clarence & Lilly Pickett Endowment’s filings →

More from the funding graph