Skip to content
Good Samaritan Regional Health Center at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Good Samaritan Regional Health Center

Through our exceptional health care services, we reveal the healing presence of god.

$224k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$143k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Health$284kArts & Culture$64kCommunity Improvement$24kEducation$17kPhilanthropy$15kHuman Services$6kCrime & Legal$5k
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $190,214, the rows itemized in this filing. The $223,667 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $33,453 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k5 grants · $32k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $143k
$7,350
Median grant
1
States reached
$170M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
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 (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%GOOD SAMARITAN REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATION: $143k → 15%GOOD SAMARITAN FOUNDATION: $142k → 15%JOHN R AND ELEANOR R MITCHELL FOUNDATION: $15k → 15%UNITED WAY OF SOUTH CENTRAL ILLINOIS: $15k → 15%JOHN R AND ELEANOR R MITCHELL FOUNDATION: $15k → 15%JOHN R AND ELEANOR R MITCHELL FOUNDATION: $10k → 15%John R and Eleanor R Mitchell Foundation: $10k → 15%MT VERNON HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 201 FOUNDATION: $10k → 15%Greater Jefferson County Chamber of Commerce: $10k → 15%JEFFERSON COUNTY CEO: $8k → 15%John R and Eleanor R Mitchell Foundation: $8k → 15%MT VERNON TOWNSHIP HIGH SCHOOL: $7k → 15%GREATER JEFFERSON COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $6k → 15%FAMILY LIFE: $6k → 15%MT VERNON FESTIVALS INC: $6k → 15%THE AMY SCHULZ CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $5k → 15%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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$358k · 3 repeat orgs$57k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +21% since the first grant, against +5% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
3

Total granted

$358k
$31k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
+5%

Still filing today

100%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $26k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
PhilanthropyEducationYouth DevelopmentArts & CultureCrime & 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

  • GS
    GOOD SAMARITAN REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATION
    2× · 2023–2024 · $284k · revenue +36% · 25% of their budget
  • JR
    JOHN R AND ELEANOR R MITCHELL FOUNDATION
    5× · 2020–2024 · $58k · revenue +21%
  • GJ
    GREATER JEFFERSON COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
    2× · 2021–2024 · $16k · revenue -4%

Funded once

  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF SOUTH CENTRAL ILLINOIS
    one grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue +5%
  • MD
    MVTHS DISTRICT 201 FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -77%
  • FL
    FAMILY LIFE
    one grant, 2023 · $6k
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
Jefferson County Development Corporation

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…

Community Improvement
2
Jefferson County Historical Society

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…

—
3
Jefferson Chamber of Commerce

Promote economic development in jefferson wi for its members

—
4
Leadership Council Southwestern Illinois

Uniting the southwestern illinois and greater st. louis region for economic growth

—
5
The Jefferson County Education Association Excellence Fund

The excellence fund supports future and current teachers by providing funds to further their education.

Education
6
Jefferson County Education Foundati

Support jefferson county school district

Education
7
Jefferson City Chamber of Commerce

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…

—
8
Missouri Valley Growth Inc

To promote economic growth for the city of vermillion

Community Improvement
9
Friends of Mchenry County College Foundation

Together with our community we build financial support for student learning and success.

Education
10
Jeffersonville Main Street Inc

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…

Community Improvement
11
Jeffersonville Urban Enterprise Association Inc

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

Community Improvement
12
Blackhawk Waterways Cvb

Promote tourism in nw illinois

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mvths District 201 Foundation; 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.
04the grantee network

8 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. 8 of the 10 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GOOD SAMARITAN REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATION: $284,300 · OtherGOOD SAMARITAN REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATIONJOHN R AND ELEANOR R MITCHELL FOUNDATION: $57,900 · OtherJOHN R AND ELEANOR R MITCHELL FOUNDATIONGREATER JEFFERSON COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $16,070 · Other+2 more: $13,350 · OtherUNITED WAY OF SOUTH CENTRAL ILLINOIS: $15,000 · PhilanthropyMVTHS DISTRICT 201 FOUNDATION: $10,000 · EducationJEFFERSON COUNTY CEO INC: $7,500 · Youth DevelopmentMT VERNON FESTIVALS INC: $6,000 · Arts & CultureAMY SCHULZ CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $5,100 · Crime & Legal
Other$371,620Philanthropy$15,000Education$10,000Youth Development$7,500Arts & Culture$6,000Crime & Legal$5,100

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetGOOD SAMARITAN REGIONAL HEALTH CENTER FOUNDATION: $284,300 over 2y, 25% of budgetJOHN R AND ELEANOR R MITCHELL FOUNDATION: $57,900 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetGREATER JEFFERSON COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $16,070 over 2y, 3.4% of budgetUNITED WAY OF SOUTH CENTRAL ILLINOIS: $15,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetMVTHS DISTRICT 201 FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetJEFFERSON COUNTY CEO INC: $7,500 over 1y, 12% of budgetMT VERNON FESTIVALS INC: $6,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetAMY SCHULZ CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $5,100 over 1y, 1.2% 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.

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.4× affinity6 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Good Samaritan Regional Health Center funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Good Samaritan Regional Health Center. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report 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.

    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 10 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Good Samaritan Regional Health Center’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