Skip to content

· Private foundation

Durnill Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$53k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$18k
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 2025.

Education$500k
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k9 grants · $21k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $31k
$1,865
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MITCHELL TECHNICAL COLLEGE$17,740
SOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY$13,610
LAKE AREA TECHNICAL COLLEGE$6,935
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH DAKOTA$4,805
BLACK HILLS STATE UNIVERSITY$2,935
DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY$1,865
WESTERN DAKOTA TECHNICAL COLLEGE$935
EASTERN WYOMING COLLEGE$935
DAKOTA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY$935
MILES COMMUNITY COLLEGE$935
SOUTH DAKOTA SCHOOL OF MINES$930
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 (FY25–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%MILES COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $935 → 11%EASTERN WYOMING COLLEGE: $935 → 15%DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY: $2k → 10%BLACK HILLS STATE UNIVERSITY: $3k → 11%LAKE AREA TECHNICAL COLLEGE: $7k → 11%SOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY: $14k → 13%MITCHELL TECHNICAL COLLEGE: $18k → 14%SOUTH DAKOTA SCHOOL OF MINES: $930 → 14%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH DAKOTA: $5k → 20%DAKOTA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY: $935 → 14%WESTERN DAKOTA TECHNICAL COLLEGE: $935 → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

MT
ND
MN
WY
SD
UT
CO
NE
FL
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$456k · 25 repeat orgs$44k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +61% since the first grant, against -99% for those funded once.

25 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 17 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
11

Total granted

$456k
$18k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+61%
-99%

Still filing today

24%
9%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 51% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $26k went to new ones.

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

  • DW
    DAKOTA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY
    7× · 2018–2025 · $23k · revenue +16%
  • AU
    AUGUSTANA UNIVERSITY ASSOCIATION
    4× · 2021–2024 · $11k · revenue +42%
  • UO
    University of Jamestown
    5× · 2018–2022 · $9k · revenue +104%

Funded once

  • SD
    SOUTH DAKOTA SCHOOL OF MINES&TECH FDN
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
  • PC
    Presentation College
    one grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue -99%
  • AT
    ANOKA TECHNICAL COLLEGE
    one grant, 2018 · $2k
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
Midlands Technical College

To build meaningful relationships with donors that lead to gifts that support the mission of midlands technical college to prepare students for success in the workforce.

Education
2
Massachusetts Higher Education

Provide access to and conduct activities in furtherance of higher education.

—
3
South Dakota State University Foundation

Uniting the dreams of our students, university, and donors to build a better sdsu.

Education
4
The Northern Michigan University

The nmu foundation will establish and foster relationships to generate resources that benefit the strategic goals of northern michigan university.

Education
5
University of South Dakota Foundation

Provide private resources to benefit the university of south dakota.

Education
6
St Marys University of Minnesota

Saint mary's university of minnesota is a private catholic institution that serves about 3,900 students annually. the university offers a comprehensive, personalized education guided by its lasallian catholic heritage. with a wide array of…

Education
7
Huntington University

Huntington university is a christ centered institution that exists to carry out the mission of christ in higher education through a curriculum of academic excellence.

Education
8
Shanghai Jiao Tong University Foundation of America (Sjtufa)
Education
9
The Associates of the University

The Organization's mission is to accept donations from sources within the United States for the benefit of the University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

—
10
Auxiliary Services State University

The organization operates, manages and promotes ancillary services for the benefit of the campus community, including faculty, staff and students in harmony with the educational mission and goals of the state university college at suny…

Education
11
Benedict College

Benedict college will be a power for good in society. the college is a full opportunity college with high quality programs of teaching, research, and public service. these programs provide the students and community with knowledge, skills,…

Education
12
University of Southern Mississippi

The mission of the alumni association is to benefit the university of southern mississippi, its students, and alumni through upholding traditions, sponsoring activities, events, and publications.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mount Marty University; the most unlike its peers is University of Jamestown. 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

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 39 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
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY: $122,782 · OtherSOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITYMITCHELL TECHNICAL INSTITUTE: $70,488 · OtherMITCHELL TECHNICAL INSTITUTEUNIVERSITY OF SOUTH DAKOTA: $38,657 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF SOUTH DAKOTALAKE AREA TECHNICAL INSTITUTE: $32,840 · OtherLAKE AREA TECHNICAL INSTITUTEBLACK HILLS STATE UNIVERSITY: $26,844 · OtherBLACK HILLS STATE UNIVERSITYMITCHELL TECHNICAL COLLEGE: $17,740 · OtherWESTERN DAKOTA TECHNICAL INSTITUTE: $15,100 · Other+25 more: $107,350 · Other+25 moreDAKOTA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY: $23,487 · EducationDAKOTA WESLEYAN…AUGUSTANA UNIVERSITY ASSOCIATION: $10,748 · EducationAUGUSTANA UNIVE…University of Jamestown: $9,480 · EducationUniversity of J…SDSM&T CENTER FOR ALUMNI RELATIONS & ADVANCEMENT: $7,704 · EducationSDSM&T CENTER F…University of Mary: $7,282 · EducationUniversity of M…MOUNT MARTY UNIVERSITY: $7,199 · EducationMOUNT MARTY UNI…+1 more: $2,010 · Education
Other$431,801Education$67,910

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

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDAKOTA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY: $23,487 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetAUGUSTANA UNIVERSITY ASSOCIATION: $10,748 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Jamestown: $9,480 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSDSM&T CENTER FOR ALUMNI RELATIONS & ADVANCEMENT: $7,704 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Mary: $7,282 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetMOUNT MARTY UNIVERSITY: $7,199 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetPresentation College: $2,010 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 DAKOTA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds AUGUSTANA UNIVERSITY ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds University of Jamestown ↗
  • Who funds SDSM&T CENTER FOR ALUMNI RELATIONS & ADVANCEMENT ↗
  • Who funds University of Mary ↗
  • Who funds MOUNT MARTY UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds Presentation College ↗

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.

South Dakota Community FoundationSD15.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: South Dakota Community Foundation · Tulsa Community Foundation · Edward L Schwab Memorial Foundation Dacotah Bank · Glasgow High School Educational Trust · 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 Durnill Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Durnill Charitable Trust. 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%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s 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 · 0–15%
    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.

    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 39 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 Durnill’s filings →

    More from the funding graph