· Public charity
Good Samaritan Regional Health Center
Through our exceptional health care services, we reveal the healing presence of god.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 7 grants below total $190,214 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $223,667 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $33,453 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k5 grants · $32k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $143k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GOOD SAMARITAN REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATION | $142,794 |
| JOHN R AND ELEANOR R MITCHELL FOUNDATION | $15,400 |
| JEFFERSON COUNTY CEO | $7,500 |
| MT VERNON TOWNSHIP HIGH SCHOOL | $7,350 |
| GREATER JEFFERSON COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE | $6,070 |
| MT VERNON FESTIVALS INC | $6,000 |
| THE AMY SCHULZ CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER | $5,100 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +21% since the first grant, against +5% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $26k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- GSGOOD SAMARITAN REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATION2× · 2023–2024 · $284k · revenue +36% · 25% of their budget
- JRJOHN R AND ELEANOR R MITCHELL FOUNDATION5× · 2020–2024 · $58k · revenue +21%
- GJGREATER JEFFERSON COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE2× · 2021–2024 · $16k · revenue -4%
Funded once
- UWUNITED WAY OF SOUTH CENTRAL ILLINOISone grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue +5%
- MDMVTHS DISTRICT 201 FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -77%
- FLFAMILY LIFEone grant, 2023 · $6k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The Jefferson County Development Corporation is a non-profit organization whose purpose is to promote economic development in the area of Jefferson County, Illinois by maintaining resource information, such as workforce data, geographic…
Our mission is to educate and stimulate interest in history in general and in the history of jefferson county, illinois in particular. to accomplish the mission objectives, the society assists in historical research, aids in collecting and…
Promote economic development in jefferson wi for its members
Uniting the southwestern illinois and greater st. louis region for economic growth
The excellence fund supports future and current teachers by providing funds to further their education.
Support jefferson county school district
Our mission is to promote economic vitality and strength in the Jefferson City area and be a leading public policy advocate for business people; to provide valuable services to our members; and fully participate and partner in activities…
To promote economic growth for the city of vermillion
Together with our community we build financial support for student learning and success.
To maintain and enhance the viability of Jeffersonville's historic downtown commercial and residential districts, to promote economic revitalization and encourage new businesses, and to initiate and support appropriate building and…
To encourage redevelopment in the urban portions of jeffersonville, indiana (the state-designated enterprise zone) in order to expand job opportunities and enhance residential property
Promote tourism in nw illinois
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mvths District 201 Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Amy Schulz Child Advocacy Center Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 10 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds GOOD SAMARITAN REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JOHN R AND ELEANOR R MITCHELL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GREATER JEFFERSON COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF SOUTH CENTRAL ILLINOIS ↗
- Who funds MVTHS DISTRICT 201 FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JEFFERSON COUNTY CEO INC ↗
- Who funds MT VERNON FESTIVALS INC ↗
- Who funds AMY SCHULZ CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Good Samaritan Regional Health Center funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.