Skip to content
Fredrick G and Rebekah B Hughes Charitable at a glance

· Private foundation

Fredrick G and Rebekah B Hughes Charitable

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.

$37k
Granted FY2025still arriving
23
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$134kHealth$71kHuman Services$61kArts & Culture$29kYouth Development$10kReligion$10kCommunity Improvement$7kCrime & Legal$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$827k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MISSOURI SOUTHERN FOUNDATION$2,500
FAMILY SELF-HELP CENTER INC$2,500
CHILDRENS CENTER OF SW MISSOURI$2,500
CONNECT2CULTURE$2,500
PROMUSICA$2,500
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF SW MISSOURI$2,025
MERCY HEALTH FOUNDATION JOPLIN$2,000
COMMUNITY HEALTH CLINIC OF JOPLIN$2,000
FREEMAN HEALTH SYSTEM$2,000
JOPLIN LIBRARY FOUNDATION$2,000
BRIGHT FUTURES JOPLIN$1,500
LIFE CHOICE MEDICAL SERVICES$1,500
REGIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE ASSOC$1,500
WILDCAT GLADES FRIENDS GROUP$1,500
MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$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:

Its human-services grants (FY19–25, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%COMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES: $2k → 8%COMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES: $1k → 8%BRIGHT FUTURES JOPLIN: $3k → 15%BRIGHT FUTURES JOPLIN: $3k → 18%JOPLIN FAMILY YMCA: $2k → 15%JOPLIN FAMILY YMCA: $1k → 15%VITA NOVA VILLAGE: $2k → 18%BRIGHT FUTURES JOPLIN: $2k → 18%BRIGHT FUTURES JOPLIN: $2k → 18%VITA NOVA VILLAGE: $1k → 18%WATERED GARDENS: $1k → 18%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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$323k · 35 repeat orgs$38k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +23% since the first grant, against -5% for those funded once.

35 repeat relationships: 20 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

35
19

Total granted

$323k
$33k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
-5%

Still filing today

57%
21%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
Human ServicesEducationHealthArts & CulturePhilanthropyCrime & LegalOther
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

  • MS
    MISSOURI SOUTHERN FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2025 · $105k · revenue +110%
  • FS
    FAMILY SELF HELP CENTER INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $22k · revenue +0%
  • PM
    PRO MUSICA
    7× · 2018–2025 · $13k · revenue +28%

Funded once

  • MH
    MERCY HEALTH OF JOPLIN
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • MS
    MAIN STREET JOPLIN DBA--
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • BA
    BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF SOUTHWEST MO
    one grant, 2023 · $3k
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
Joplin Area Chamber of Commerce

To improve the economic prosperity and quality of life in the joplin region, and to be the principal advocate for, and provider of services to its business community

—
2
Joplin Business and Industrial Development Corporation

Development of jobs in the joplin, mo area

Community Improvement
3
Jefferson Community Counseling Cent Dba Discovery Behavioral Healthcare

Discovery behavioral healthcare is a community based health treatment center dedicated to providing state of the art services to foster recovery and resilience in an accessible, respective and caring environment.

Youth Development
4
Crosslines Churches of the Joplin Area

The organization provides emergency services that improve the overall health and welfare of very low and low income individuals and families in the joplin, carl junction, and webb city areas.

Human Services
5
Jefferson Regional Foundation

The mission of the foundation is to improve the health and well-being of the communities served by jefferson hospital through engagement, community-driven research and grantmaking. there are three grantmaking priorities focused on the…

Health
6
Jefferson Area Community Outreach for Older People

Help seniors maintain healthy, secure and independent lifestyles by providing no cost supported services.

—
7
Solace House of the Ozarks Inc

Provide a safe home of care and comfort for end-of-life patients.

Human Services
8
Joplin Area Chamber of Commerce Foundation

Founded to further charitable, scientific,literacy, civic, athletic, patriotic, cultural, social and educational purposes.

Education
9
Mental Health Assoc in Jefferson County Inc

The mental health association is committed to individual service in a community based setting that promotes recovery, dignity, personal growth, self determination and health.

—
10
Freeman Neosho Hospital Inc

To improve the health of the communities we serve through contemporary, innovative, quality healthcare solutions.

Health
11
Mercy Hospital Joplin

As the sisters of mercy before us, we bring to life the healing ministry of jesus through our compassionate care and exceptional service.

Health
12
Mercy Health Southwest Missourikansas Communities

As the sisters of mercy before us, we bring to life the healing ministry of jesus through our compassionate care and exceptional service.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mercy Health Foundation Joplin; the most unlike its peers is Rx Outreach 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

28 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. 28 of the 57 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
24/28
Grantees still filing
16/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FAMILY SELF HELP CENTER INC: $21,600 · OtherFAMILY SELF HELP CENTER INCREGIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE: $14,000 · OtherREGIONAL HEALTH AND WELFAREPRO MUSICA: $13,000 · OtherPRO MUSICACOMMUNITY CLINIC OF SOUTHWEST MISSOURI: $12,500 · OtherCOMMUNITY CLINIC OF SOUTHWEST MISSOURIMERCY HEALTH FOUNDATION JOPLIN: $12,000 · OtherMERCY HEALTH FOUNDATION JOPLINCHILDRENS CENTER OF SW MISSOURI: $11,612 · OtherCHILDRENS CENTER OF SW MISSOURIIndividual grant recipient: $10,400 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $8,000 · OtherJOPLIN SCHOOLS: $7,500 · Other+31 more: $79,600 · Other+31 moreMISSOURI SOUTHERN FOUNDATION: $104,500 · EducationMISSOURI SOUTHERN FOUNDATIONJOPLIN LIBRARY FOUNDATION: $6,160 · EducationJOPLIN LIBRARY FOUNDATION+2 more: $3,000 · EducationFREEMAN HEALTH SYSTEM: $7,500 · HealthLIFECHOICES: $7,500 · HealthASCENT RECOVERY RESIDENCES INC: $2,600 · HealthRX Outreach Inc: $1,000 · HealthBright Futures Joplin: $9,000 · Human ServicesVITA NOVA VILLAGE: $2,500 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES INC: $2,500 · Human ServicesJOPLIN FAMILY Y: $2,500 · Human ServicesWATERED GARDENS RESCUE MISSION: $1,000 · Human ServicesConnect2Culture: $7,500 · Arts & CultureGEORGE A SPIVA CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $2,000 · Arts & CultureJASPER COUNTY CASA: $6,500 · Crime & LegalBREAST CANCER FOUNDATION OF THE OZARKS: $5,000 · Philanthropy
Other$190,212Education$113,660Health$18,600Human Services$17,500Arts & Culture$9,500Crime & Legal$6,500Philanthropy$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMISSOURI SOUTHERN FOUNDATION: $104,500 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetFAMILY SELF HELP CENTER INC: $21,600 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetREGIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE: $14,000 over 6y, 12% of budgetPRO MUSICA: $13,000 over 7y, 2.4% of budgetCOMMUNITY CLINIC OF SOUTHWEST MISSOURI: $12,500 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetMERCY HEALTH FOUNDATION JOPLIN: $12,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetBright Futures Joplin: $9,000 over 4y, 2.9% of budgetConnect2Culture: $7,500 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetFREEMAN HEALTH SYSTEM: $7,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetLIFECHOICES: $7,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetJASPER COUNTY CASA: $6,500 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetBREAST CANCER FOUNDATION OF THE OZARKS: $5,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJOPLIN ASSOCIATION FOR THE BLIND: $4,500 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetCEREBRAL PALSY OF TRI COUNTY: $4,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetNAMI JOPLIN: $3,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetASCENT RECOVERY RESIDENCES INC: $2,600 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetVITA NOVA VILLAGE: $2,500 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES INC: $2,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJOPLIN FAMILY Y: $2,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWILDCAT GLADES NATURE GROUP: $2,500 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetMISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGEORGE A SPIVA CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $2,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCROWDER COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJOPLIN HISTORICAL & MINERAL MUSEUM INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetRX Outreach Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMAIN STREET JOPLIN: $500 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.

  • Who funds MISSOURI SOUTHERN FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY SELF HELP CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds REGIONAL HEALTH AND WELFARE ↗
  • Who funds PRO MUSICA ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY CLINIC OF SOUTHWEST MISSOURI ↗
  • Who funds MERCY HEALTH FOUNDATION JOPLIN ↗
  • Who funds Bright Futures Joplin ↗
  • Who funds Connect2Culture ↗
  • Who funds FREEMAN HEALTH SYSTEM ↗
  • Who funds LIFECHOICES ↗
  • Who funds JASPER COUNTY CASA ↗
  • Who funds JOPLIN LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION OF THE OZARKS ↗
  • Who funds JOPLIN ASSOCIATION FOR THE BLIND ↗
  • Who funds CEREBRAL PALSY OF TRI COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds NAMI JOPLIN ↗
  • Who funds ASCENT RECOVERY RESIDENCES INC ↗
  • Who funds VITA NOVA VILLAGE ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds JOPLIN FAMILY Y ↗
  • Who funds WILDCAT GLADES NATURE GROUP ↗
  • Who funds MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds GEORGE A SPIVA CENTER FOR THE ARTS ↗

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.

Jean Jack and Mildred…W R Corley Memorial T…Community Foundation …Freeman R Johnson Tru…Cragin Joy Spiva Char…Arvest FoundationCloyd a Carlin Charit…The Bramlage and Will…The Farber FoundationMercy Health Southwes…Commerce Bancshares F…Freeman Health System
Jean Jack and Mildred Lemons Charitable TrustWI53.9× affinity23 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jean Jack and Mildred Lemons Charitable Trust · W R Corley Memorial Trust CO SMB Trust Services · Community Foundation of the Ozarks Inc · Freeman R Johnson Trust · Cragin Joy Spiva Charitable Trust · Arvest Foundation · Cloyd a Carlin Charitable Trust · The Bramlage and Willcoxon Foundation · The Farber Foundation · Mercy Health Southwest Missourikansas Communities · Commerce Bancshares Foundation · Freeman Health System

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 Fredrick G and Rebekah B Hughes Charitable funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Fredrick G and Rebekah B Hughes Charitable. 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%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Community Support Services Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
9report 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Fredrick G and Rebekah B Hughes Charitable?

Find your warmest path to Fredrick G and Rebekah B Hughes Charitable 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 57 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 Fredrick G and Rebekah B Hughes’ 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