Skip to content

· Private foundation

David and Betty Paradise Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$63k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
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, FY2024 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$60kCommunity Improvement$55kHealth$40kReligion$27kPhilanthropy$1kHuman Services$500
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $55k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$72k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATCHEZ FESTIVAL OF MUSIC$25,000
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER$20,000
DR JOHN BOWMAN BANKS MUSEUM$10,000
DOWNTOWN NATCHEZ ALLIANCE$5,000
ANTIOCH MISSIONARY BAPTIST ASSOCIATION$1,500
THE CHARLIE FOUNDATION$1,000
EVA'S VILLAGE$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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY24–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 27%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER: $20k → 16%CITY OF NATCHEZ: $50k → 31%EVA'S VILLAGE: $500 → 12%UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER: $20k → 16%CHRIST CHURCH: $25k → 31%DR JOHN BOWMAN BANKS MUSEUM: $10k → 31%DOWNTOWN NATCHEZ ALLIANCE: $5k → 31%ANTIOCH MISSIONARY BAPTIST ASSOCIATION: $2k → 31%THE CHARLIE FOUNDATION: $1k → 31%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 field
04the grantee network

3 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. 3 of the 9 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)
3/3
Grantees still filing
0/3
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF NATCHEZ: $50,000 · OtherCITY OF NATCHEZNATCHEZ FESTIVAL OF MUSIC: $50,000 · OtherNATCHEZ FESTIVAL OF MUSICUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER: $40,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTERCHRIST CHURCH: $25,000 · OtherCHRIST CHURCHDR JOHN BOWMAN BANKS MUSEUM: $10,000 · OtherDR JOHN BOWMAN BANKS MUSEUM+1 more: $1,500 · OtherDOWNTOWN NATCHEZ ALLIANCE: $5,000 · Community ImprovementEVA'S VILLAGE INC: $500 · Community ImprovementTHE CHARLIE FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Philanthropy
Other$176,500Community Improvement$5,500Philanthropy$1,000

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 budgetTHE CHARLIE FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetEVA'S VILLAGE INC: $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 DOWNTOWN NATCHEZ ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds THE CHARLIE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds EVA'S VILLAGE INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization David and Betty Paradise Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from David and Betty Paradise Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 19%
  • Eva's Village Inc: 19% 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 · 0–40%
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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to David and Betty Paradise Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to David and Betty Paradise 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 9 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on David and Betty Paradise’s filings →

More from the funding graph