Skip to content
Corporation for Social and Educational Development at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Corporation for Social and Educational Development

To promote intellectual, moral, cultural and religious development irrespective of race, color, creed, nationality and financial resources.

$310k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$160k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2024.

Education$3.1MReligion$489kHuman Services$69k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $78k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $232k
$37,659
Median grant
5
States reached
$3.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER$160,000
ROSEMOOR FOUNDATION$71,960
LINDELL STUDY CENTER$37,659
SHELLBOURNE INC$25,000
PETAWA CULTURAL CENTER$15,798
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 (FY18–25, $1.2M) 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%LINDELL STUDY CENTER: $38k → 11%LINDELL STUDY CENTER: $37k → 11%LINDELL STUDY CENTER: $25k → 11%LINDELL STUDY CENTER: $7k → 11%ELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER: $196k → 14%ELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER: $180k → 14%ELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER: $160k → 14%ELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER: $152k → 14%ELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER: $139k → 14%ELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER: $105k → 14%ELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER: $99k → 14%ELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER: $85k → 14%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.9M · 9 repeat orgs$18k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
2

Total granted

$3.9M
$18k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+102%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’22’23’24’25
ReligionEducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • EU
    ELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER
    8× · 2018–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +87% · 52% of their budget
  • SI
    SHELLBOURNE INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $399k · revenue +8%
  • RF
    ROSEMOOR FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2017–2025 · $176k · revenue +29%

Funded once

  • WF
    WOODLAWN FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $9k · revenue -3%
  • WI
    WYNNCLIFF INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $9k · revenue +102%
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
Arborlea Study Center

We believe women play an integral role in shaping the family, workplaces, and the course of civilization. By accompanying women at every life stage, Arborlea Study Center aims to inspire women to develop personally, professionally and…

Arts & Culture
2
Center for Wisdoms Women

The center for wisdoms women provides a sacred and safe space for the support and empowerment of women

Human Services
3
Women's Educational Center Inc Cambridge Women's Center

Provides resources, support, and educational opportunities for individuals for whom "women" is a meaningful identifier.

—
4
Womens Leadership Center at Williams Bay Nfp
Education
5
The Transforming Center

The transforming center creates space for god to strengthen the souls of leaders and transform communities by providing retreats, relationships, and resources for those who long to keep seeking god in the crucible of leadership.

Religion
6
Womanpreach

WomanPreach! Inc is committed to training preachers who often emerge from churches, academic institutions, and other spaces that are inhospitable to their vocation and their voice. We provide intimate, practical training and nurturing…

Religion
7
The Sophia Institute

The sophia institute provides leading edge programs taught by the world's foremost thinkers and teachers that foster wisdom, wholeness, oneness, sustainability, peace, and the integration of the sacred feminine and masculine for the…

Human Services
8
Womenary Inc

To provide a woman friendly setting for seminary style classes to help women grow in maturity through Christian theology

Religion
9
Alderton House Inc

Alderton house, inc. provides religious and educational formation to women through such activities as: christian doctrine classes, seminars on professional ethics and other matters of cultural interest retreats and days of recollection as…

Religion
10
Carol Mcleod Ministries Inc

Christian outreach primarily for women

—
11
Layton Study Center Inc

Cultural and religious (roman catholic) classes, religious retreats, youth programs, individual spiritual direction, care of the chapel used for roman catholic liturgical services and private prayer.

Religion
12
Wespine Study Center Inc

Courses in character development, spiritual retreats, courses in roman catholic doctrine, sports and hobby activities for youth, care of facilities for roman catholic worship, educational programs and staff residence. the spiritual…

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sherlake Cultural Center; the most unlike its peers is Rosemoor Foundation Inc. 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

11 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
6/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PETAWA RESIDENCE AND CULTURAL CENTER INC: $1,832,211 · EducationPETAWA RESIDENCE AND CULTURAL CENTER INCSHERLAKE CULTURAL CENTER: $87,116 · EducationELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER: $1,115,287 · Human ServicesELMS UNIVERSITY CENTERLINDELL STUDY CENTER: $107,014 · Human ServicesLINDELL STUDY CENTERSHELLBOURNE INC: $399,398 · ReligionSHELLBOURNE INCSOUTHOLD CENTER FOR EDUCATION INC: $129,537 · ReligionSOUTHOLD CENTER …THE GROVE CULTURAL CENTER: $40,000 · ReligionTHE GROVE CULTUR…+2 more: $17,604 · ReligionROSEMOOR FOUNDATION INC: $175,966 · PhilanthropyLEXINGTON CENTER INC: $57,000 · Housing & Shelter
Education$1,919,327Human Services$1,222,301Religion$586,539Philanthropy$175,966Housing & Shelter$57,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPETAWA RESIDENCE AND CULTURAL CENTER INC: $1,832,211 over 7y, 40% of budgetELMS UNIVERSITY CENTER: $1,115,287 over 8y, 52% of budgetSHELLBOURNE INC: $399,398 over 8y, 5.2% of budgetROSEMOOR FOUNDATION INC: $175,966 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetSOUTHOLD CENTER FOR EDUCATION INC: $129,537 over 2y, 8.0% of budgetLINDELL STUDY CENTER: $107,014 over 4y, 25% of budgetSHERLAKE CULTURAL CENTER: $87,116 over 3y, 49% of budgetLEXINGTON CENTER INC: $57,000 over 5y, 6.3% of budgetTHE GROVE CULTURAL CENTER: $40,000 over 3y, 39% of budgetWOODLAWN FOUNDATION: $9,000 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.

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.

Rosemoor Foundation I…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Rosemoor Foundation IncNY15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Rosemoor Foundation Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Corporation for Social and Educational Development funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Corporation for Social and Educational Development. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    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, FY20–24
    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.

    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 11 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 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 Corporation for Social and Educational Development’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