Skip to content
Frank & Laura Smock Foundation Midwest Trust Company of Missouri at a glance

· Private foundation

Frank & Laura Smock Foundation Midwest Trust Company of Missouri

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$900k
Granted FY2023
37
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$52k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02Its granteesRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$1.1MHuman Services$19kRecreation & Sports$15kHealth$4kOther$0
02FY2023 · 37 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 37 grants below total $605,196, the rows itemized in this filing. The $899,645 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $294,449 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k9 grants · $41k
  • $10k–50k27 grants · $512k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $52k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$13M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
STIDHAM MEMORIAL PREBYTERIAN CHURCH$51,638
IRVINGTON PRESB CHURCH$40,000
COMMUNITY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF CHARLESTOWN$39,700
PRESBYTERIAN CHAPEL OF THE LAKES$35,000
MOUNT TABOR PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH$35,000
PRESBYTERY OF WABASH VALLEY$30,000
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF CROWN POINT$30,000
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF FORT WAYNE$30,000
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF BRAZIL$25,000
REHOBOTH PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH$25,000
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF LAGRANGE$23,000
ST. JOHNS UNITED PRESBYTERIAN CHUHRCH$22,000
TRINITY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF RUSHVILLE$20,000
PYOCA CAMP AND RETREAT CENTER$15,000
NORTHWOODS VILLAGE MEMORY CARE$12,691
02Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

82%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.7M · 9 repeat orgs$840k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2023, 1 since wound down; 29 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
21

Total granted

$3.7M
$382k

Still filing today

0%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 24% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $458k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’22’23
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    4× · 2017–2020 · $3.4M
  • PO
    PRESBYTERY OF WABASH VALLEY
    2× · 2022–2023 · $90k
  • RP
    REHOBOTH PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
    2× · 2022–2023 · $70k

Funded once

  • FP
    FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF MICHIGAN CITY
    one grant, 2022 · $50k
  • PO
    PRESBYTERY OF OHIO VALLEY
    one grant, 2022 · $30k
  • WP
    WESTMINSTER PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
    one grant, 2022 · $30k
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.

03Its field
03the grantee network

2 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.

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 2024, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 2 of the 59 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)
2/2
Grantees still filing
1/2
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $3,375,123 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+57 more: $1,170,165 · Other+57 moreBeacon Health System Inc: $72 · Health
Other$4,545,288Health$72

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPYOCA CAMP AND RETREAT CENTER INC: $15,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetBeacon Health System Inc: $72 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 PYOCA CAMP AND RETREAT CENTER 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 Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Frank & Laura Smock Foundation Midwest Trust Company of Missouri?

Find your warmest path to Frank & Laura Smock Foundation Midwest Trust Company of Missouri 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 59 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $1.2M of grant expense with no grantee named in the published copy. A private foundation itemizes every grant it makes, so a return carrying none has filed its list as an attachment that the public copy does not include. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Frank & Laura Smock Foundation Midwest Trust Company of Missouri’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