Skip to content

· Private foundation

Davis Family Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$255k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$157k
Largest
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$842kHealth$450kPhilanthropy$269kReligion$85kArts & Culture$51kHuman Services$30kRecreation & Sports$12kCommunity Improvement$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $232k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NAPLES CHILDREN AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION$156,500
UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PROTFOLIO MANAGEMENT$75,000
OHIO HOSPICE FOUNDATION$10,000
ST ANN CATHOLIC CHURCH$5,000
HOLY ANGELS$5,000
FOLDS OF HONOR$2,500
FIRECRACKER 5K AT DEERFIELD INC$1,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%MICRO GRANTS OF SW FL: $5k → 11%NOTES FOR EDUCATION GARGIULO VINEYARDS: $5k → 9%NAPLES CHILDREN'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $93k → 10%PINK RIBBON GIRLS: $20k → 10%FOLDS OF HONOR CO DAYTON COUNTRY CLUB: $5k → 14%NAPLES CHILDREN & EDUCATION: $5k → 10%PINK RIBBON GIRLS: $5k → 10%PINK RIBBON GIRLS: $5k → 10%NAPLES CHILDREN EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $166k → 10%WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $5k → 9%OHIO HOSPICE FOUNDATION: $10k → 14%NAPLES CHILDREN AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $157k → 10%CHURCH OF THE HOLY ANGELS: $5k → 14%NAPLES CHILDREN AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $106k → 10%CHURCH OF THE HOLY ANGELS: $5k → 14%NAPLES CHILDREN EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $41k → 10%HOLY ANGELS: $5k → 14%AVOW FOUNDATION: $5k → 10%CHURCH OF THE HOLY ANGELS: $5k → 14%AVOW: $5k → 10%CHURCH OF THE HOLY ANGELS: $5k → 14%NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN: $5k → 10%MARK ANDREW KREUSCH MEMORIAL FUND: $5k → 14%NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN: $5k → 10%CHURCH OF THE HOLY ANGELS: $5k → 14%ST ANN CATHOLIC CHURCH: $5k → 10%HOLY ANGELS: $5k → 14%ST ANN CATHOLIC CHURCH: $5k → 10%CHURCH OF THE HOLY ANGELS: $5k → 14%MICRO GRANTS OF SW FL: $5k → 10%DAYTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $50k → 14%DAYTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $50k → 14%DAYTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $50k → 14%DAYTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $50k → 14%THE SALVATION ARMY OF GREATER DAYTON: $10k → 14%PINK RIBBON GIRLS: $10k → 14%PINK RIBBON GIRLS: $10k → 14%VICTORIA THEATRE ASSOCIATION: $20k → 14%VICTORIA THEATRE ASSOCIATION: $20k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PROTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: $100k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: $75k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PROTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: $75k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: $75k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: $75k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: $75k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: $75k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: $75k → 14%UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: $75k → 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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.6M · 19 repeat orgs$145k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +140% since the first grant, against +87% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
16

Total granted

$1.6M
$134k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+140%
+87%

Still filing today

32%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthEducationArts & CultureEnvironmentPhilanthropyRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • NC
    NAPLES CHILDREN FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2019–2025 · $268k · revenue +54%
  • DC
    DAYTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL
    4× · 2017–2020 · $200k · revenue +140%
  • PR
    PINK RIBBON GOOD INC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $55k · revenue +164%

Funded once

  • NC
    NAPLES CHILDREN'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $93k
  • WS
    Wright State University Foundation Incgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +68%
  • MA
    MARK A KREUSCH MEMORIAL FUND
    one grant, 2018 · $5k
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
University of Florida Health Corporation

UF Health's mission is to promote health through outstanding and high-quality patient care, innovative and rigorous education in the health professions and biomedical sciences, and high-impact research across the spectrum of basic,…

—
2
Naples Zoo Inc

Naples zoo is accredited by the american zoo & aquarium association (aza) and has numerous animal exhibits placed on its 45-acre site. (continued on schedule o)each exhibit is unique and designed to simulate typical conditions for the…

Animals
3
Avow Hospice Inc

To provide a continuation of home outpatient and home-like inpatient palliative and supportive care to patients and families of patients with life-limiting illnesses.

Human Services
4
Hospice of Miami County Inc

The hospice of miami county, inc. is committed to making quality hospice care available and accessible to terminally ill persons and their families, regardless of ability pay, and in a manner consistent with the highest hospice standards.…

—
5
Hospice of Okeechobee Inc

Hospice of Okeechobee, Inc. provides hospice services that relieve the suffering of persons residing in its communities affected by life-limiting illnesses and end-of-life issues so all may live as fully and comfortably as possible.

Human Services
6
Hospice of Dayton Inc

The hospice of dayton, inc. is committed to making quality hospice care available and accessible to terminally ill persons and their families, regardless of ability to pay, and in a manner consistent with the highest hospice standards. our…

Human Services
7
Hospice of the Treasure Coast Inc

Hospice of the treasure coast, inc. exists to provide hospice, grief counseling, education and other services to patients and families dealing with death and dying so that they might live as fully and comfortably as possible.

—
8
University of South Florida Foundation Inc

University of South Florida Foundation, Inc.'s mission is to provide charitable and educational aid to the University of South Florida; to promote education and other related activities of the University; and to encourage research,…

Education
9
Miami Valley Hospital Foundation

Enhance the patient and family experience at miami valley hospital by raising community support for cutting-edge programs and services which help build healthy communities.

Health
10
Hospice of Fayette County Inc

Provide home or nursing home care for terminally ill patients and their families. provided education & support to fayette county and surrounding communities about qualify of life issues.

—
11
Hospice of Martin & St Lucie Inc

Hospice of martin & st. lucie, inc. exists to provide hospice, grief counseling, education and other services to patients and families, dealing with death and dying so that they might live as fully and comfortably as possible. hospice…

Human Services
12
St Joseph's Hospital of Tampa Foundation Inc

St. joseph's hospitals foundation secures, manages and stewards philanthropic support to benefit the health care mission of st. joseph's hospital, st. joseph's women's hospital, st. joseph's children's hospital of tampa, st. joseph's…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Avow Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Firecracker 5 K At Deerfield 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

12 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. 12 of the 37 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: $525,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENTNAPLES CHILDREN EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $206,166 · OtherNAPLES CHILDREN EDUCATION FOUNDATIONUNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PROTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: $175,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF DAYTON DAVIS CENTER FOR PROTFOLIO MANAGEMENTNAPLES CHILDREN'S EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $93,000 · OtherNAPLES CHILDREN'S EDUCATION FOUNDATIONST ANN CATHOLIC CHURCH: $40,000 · Other+21 more: $119,390 · Other+21 moreDAYTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $200,000 · HealthDAYTON CHILDREN'S…PINK RIBBON GOOD INC: $55,000 · HealthPINK RIBBON GOOD …OHIO'S HOSPICE FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Health+2 more: $10,000 · HealthNAPLES CHILDREN FOUNDATION INC: $267,950 · PhilanthropyNAPLES CHILDREN F…VICTORIA THEATRE ASSOCIATION: $40,000 · Arts & CultureNAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN INC: $10,000 · EnvironmentWright State University Foundation Inc: $5,085 · EducationFIRECRACKER 5 K AT DEERFIELD INC: $1,000 · EducationFreedom Waters Foundation Inc: $5,560 · Recreation & Sports
Other$1,158,556Health$275,000Philanthropy$267,950Arts & Culture$40,000Environment$10,000Education$6,085Recreation & Sports$5,560

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 budgetNAPLES CHILDREN FOUNDATION INC: $267,950 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetDAYTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $200,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPINK RIBBON GOOD INC: $55,000 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetVICTORIA THEATRE ASSOCIATION: $40,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetOHIO'S HOSPICE FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFreedom Waters Foundation Inc: $5,560 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetWright State University Foundation Inc: $5,085 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAvow Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAvow Foundation Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNAPLES HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC: $840 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 NAPLES CHILDREN FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds DAYTON CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL ↗
  • Who funds PINK RIBBON GOOD INC ↗
  • Who funds VICTORIA THEATRE ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds NAPLES BOTANICAL GARDEN INC ↗
  • Who funds OHIO'S HOSPICE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Freedom Waters Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds Wright State University Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds Avow Inc ↗
  • Who funds Avow Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds FIRECRACKER 5 K AT DEERFIELD INC ↗
  • Who funds NAPLES HISTORICAL SOCIETY 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.

Dayton Foundation DepositoryOH13.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Dayton Foundation Depository · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Davis Family Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Davis Family Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Naples Botanical Garden Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get 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 · 0–5%
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 Davis Family Charitable Trust?

Find your warmest path to Davis Family Charitable Trust 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 37 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 Davis Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph