Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Harold S Seabrook Tr

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$77k
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What you fund
0190% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Food & Nutrition$91kArts & Culture$90kYouth Development$85kCrime & Legal$80kReligion$70kRecreation & Sports$63kHuman Services$61kHousing & Shelter$28kOther$0
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k16 grants · $67k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR$10,000
YOUTH PARTNERS OF PINE BLUFF -$7,927
CASA$7,000
ARTS AND SCIENCE CENTER$7,000
SOAR$7,000
Individual grant recipient$6,903
DEPAUL USA$6,000
THE SALVATION ARMY$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
WHITE HALL FOOD PANTRY$3,855
SOUTHEAST ARK BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE$2,400
JEFFERSON COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY$2,000
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$2,000
CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER$2,000
BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA$1,200
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $72k) land where the poverty rate runs at 22%, against an area that typically sits at 17%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 17%NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR: $15k → 22%NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR: $11k → 22%NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR: $11k → 22%NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR: $11k → 22%NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR: $11k → 22%NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR: $10k → 22%NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR: $3k → 22%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$645k · 25 repeat orgs$54k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +29% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

25 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

25
5

Total granted

$645k
$30k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
0%

Still filing today

36%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 69% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $24k 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
Youth DevelopmentCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesCrime & LegalAnimalsArts & CultureOther

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

  • NT
    NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $84k · revenue +6%
  • VF
    VOICES FOR CHILDRENCOURT APPOINTED SPEC ADVOCATES
    7× · 2017–2023 · $33k · revenue +29%
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
    5× · 2019–2025 · $28k · revenue +24%

Funded once

  • SA
    SOUTHEAST ARK COLLEGE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $12k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
  • TF
    TAYLOR FIELD PRESERVATION FUND INC
    one grant, 2023 · $5k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Boone County Casa

Advocacy for abused and neglected children

Crime & Legal
2
Humane Society of Jefferson County Inc

The mission of the humane society of jefferson county is to improve the lives of animals in need through compassionate care, adoption, advocacy and education while also inspiring humane communities that foster kindness and respect for all.

Animals
3
Just for Kids Inc

Create a safe environment for children by preventing and responding to child abuse.

Crime & Legal
4
Habitat for Humanity of Jefferson County

To provide simple but adequate housing for the working poor.

5
Casa of North Arkansas

The organization and its volunteers serve as advocates for abused and neglected children.

Civil Rights
6
Habitat for Humanity Pope County Ar

Seeking to put gods love in action by bringing people together to build homes for those in need

7
Northwest Arkansas Children's Shelter in Dba Everhope Arkansas Inc

To provide a safe have, high quality care, and hope for the future to chidren who have been abandoned, abused, or neglected.

Human Services
8
Habitat for Humanity International Gibson County

Affordable housing for low income families.

9
Habitat for Humanity Barry County

Seeking to put god's love into action, habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities, and hope.

Housing & Shelter
10
Pulaski County Friends of Casa Inc

Pulaski County Friends of CASA, Inc. develops and supports a court-sanctioned community-based program that provides trained and supervised volunteers to advocate for the best interests of abused and neglected children involved in juvenile…

Crime & Legal
11
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Southwest Missouri

Recruit, train and support community volunteers who assist the court in protecting the best interests of abused and neglected children in southwest missouri.

Civil Rights
12
Blount County Children's Advocacy Center Inc

To provide a child-friendly, home environment in a safe and natural setting while child abuse victims and their non-offending family members/guardians can receive comprehensive and coordinated services from the agencies comprising the…

Crime & Legal

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Natural State Council and the most unlike its peers is Boys & Girls Club of Jefferson County. 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

10 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 34 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

SEABROOK FAMILY CHRISTIAN — $70,000 · OtherSEABROOK FAMILY CHRISTIANTHE SALVATION ARMY — $63,500 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMYTAYLOR FIELD COMMISSION — $53,801 · OtherTAYLOR FIELD COMMISSIONYOUTH PARTNERS OF PINE BLUFF — $39,648 · OtherYOUTH PARTNERS OF PINE BLUFFJENKINS MEMORIAL CENTER — $38,618 · OtherJENKINS MEMORIAL CENTERIndividual grant recipient — $33,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientARTS AND SCIENCE CENTER OF — $32,368 · OtherARTS AND SCIENCE CENTER OFCASA — $28,600 · OtherCASAHABITAT FOR HUMANITY — $28,378 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITYTHE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF PINE BLUFF — $18,634 · Other+16 more — $105,430 · Other+16 moreNEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC — $84,314 · Human ServicesNEIGHBOR TO N…Boys & Girls Club of Jefferson County — $27,313 · Youth DevelopmentNATURAL STATE COUNCIL — $11,400 · Youth DevelopmentVOICES FOR CHILDRENCOURT APPOINTED SPEC ADVOCATES — $32,526 · Crime & LegalPINE BLUFF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT INC — $10,241 · Community ImprovementGFPB Inc — $10,000 · Community ImprovementJEFFERSON COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY INC — $6,000 · AnimalsTAYLOR FIELD PRESERVATION FUND INC — $5,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$511,977Human Services$84,314Youth Development$38,713Crime & Legal$32,526Community Improvement$20,241Animals$6,000Arts & Culture$5,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC — $84,314 over 9y, 1.7% of budgetVOICES FOR CHILDRENCOURT APPOINTED SPEC ADVOCATES — $32,526 over 7y, 2.9% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY — $28,378 over 5y, 2.1% of budgetBoys & Girls Club of Jefferson County — $27,313 over 6y, 3.0% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF PINE BLUFF — $18,634 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetNATURAL STATE COUNCIL — $11,400 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetPINE BLUFF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT INC — $10,241 over 9y, 1.3% of budgetGFPB Inc — $10,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetJEFFERSON COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY INC — $6,000 over 3y, 5.2% of budget
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 NEIGHBOR TO NEIGHBOR INC
  • Who funds VOICES FOR CHILDRENCOURT APPOINTED SPEC ADVOCATES
  • Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
  • Who funds Boys & Girls Club of Jefferson County
  • Who funds THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF PINE BLUFF
  • Who funds NATURAL STATE COUNCIL
  • Who funds PINE BLUFF DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT INC
  • Who funds GFPB Inc
  • Who funds JEFFERSON COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY INC
  • Who funds TAYLOR FIELD PRESERVATION FUND 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 tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

United Way of Southeast Ark IncAR17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of Southeast Ark Inc · Trotter Foundation · Arkansas Community Foundation Inc · Howard Poteet Foundation · Simmons First Foundation Inc · The Kline Family Foundation · 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 Harold S Seabrook Tr 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Harold S Seabrook Tr?

    Find your warmest path to Harold S Seabrook Tr 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 34 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph