Skip to content
Irene C Evans Charity Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Irene C Evans Charity Trust

Its FY2026 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$50k
Granted FY2026still arriving
3
Grants FY2026still arriving
3
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Animals$259kOther$0
02FY2026 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$20,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LOLLYPOP FARM$20,000
LOUISIANA SPCA$20,000
ETOSHA RESCUE & ADOPTION CENTER$10,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–26) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 79% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%NEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETY: $2k → 12%LOLLYPOP FARM: $20k → 14%ETOSHA RESCUE & ADOPTION CENTER: $10k → 10%HUMANE SOC OF US: $10k → 14%HUMANE SOCIETY OF TAMPA BAY: $3k → 13%HUMANE SOCIETY OF LINCOLN COUNTY: $3k → 14%HUMANE SOCIETY OF LINCOLN COUNTY NC: $2k → 9%FRANTZ L DANTZLER FRIENDS: $8k → 13%PAWS CHICAGO: $2k → 14%CHARLOTTESVILLE ALBEMARLE SPCA: $3k → 8%LOUISIANA SPCA: $20k → 23%RUDE RANCH ANIMAL RESCUE: $10k → 6%LOLLYPOP FARM: $20k → 14%ETOSHA RESCUE & ADOPTION CENTER: $10k → 10%HUMANE SOC OF US: $8k → 14%HUMANE SOCIETY OF TAMPA BAY: $2k → 13%FRANTZ L DANTZLER FRIENDS: $8k → 13%CHARLOTTESVILLE ALBEMARLE SPCA: $2k → 8%LOUISIANA SPCA: $20k → 23%RUDE RANCH ANIMAL RESCUE: $10k → 6%HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER: $17k → 14%HUMANE SOC OF US: $8k → 14%LOUISIANA SPCA: $18k → 23%RUDE RANCH ANIMAL RESCUE: $8k → 6%HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER: $15k → 14%LOUISIANA SPCA: $17k → 23%RUDE RANCH ANIMAL RESCUE: $8k → 6%HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER: $8k → 14%LOUISIANA SPCA: $15k → 23%RUDE RANCH ANIMAL RESCUE: $4k → 6%HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER: $8k → 14%LOUISIANA SPCA: $14k → 23%HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER: $4k → 14%LOUISIANA SPCA: $8k → 23%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.

Which US states its grants reach

IL
NY
IN
NE
VA
MD
TN
NC
DC
LA
TX
FL
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$316k · 9 repeat orgs$9k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2026, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
4

Total granted

$316k
$9k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
+52%

Still filing today

56%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
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

  • RR
    RUDE RANCH ANIMAL RESCUE INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $40k · revenue +51%
  • ER
    ETOSHA RESCUE & ADOPTION CENTER
    2× · 2025–2026 · $20k · revenue +11%
  • AS
    ALBEMARLE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $5k · revenue +53%

Funded once

  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY OF LINCOLN COUNTY
    one grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue -64%
  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY OF LINCOLN COUNTY NC
    one grant, 2020 · $2k
  • NH
    NEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETYgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue +52%
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
Raskels Rescue
Animals
2
Hart

Animal shelter and rescue

Animals
3
Paws and Claws Animal Shelter
Animals
4
Animal Humane Society

Animal Humane Society (AHS) established in 1878 and incorporated as a nonprofit charitable organization in 1891 works to engage the hearts, hands, and minds of the community to help animals. AHS's vision is to compassionately and…

Animals
5
Humane Society of Hardy County Inc

The Humane Society Hardy County strives reduce feral animal populations while enhancing the health of our communities and providing for those animals that may be adopted, a safe, nurturing, and healthy environment.

Animals
6
Hope Fur Paws Rescue

To help injured, abandoned and unwanted animals. We provide food, vet care that includes heartworm prevention and spay or neuter services, shelter and anything else needed.

Animals
7
Humane Society of Central Illinois

HSCIs mission is to find loving, forever homes for abused and unwanted pets.

Animals
8
Tama County Humane Society

To operate as an animal shelter by taking in stray or surrendered animals. We provide medical care and surgical care, including spaying and neutering of all animals if needed prior to adoption.

Animals
9
Heart of Louisiana Humane Society
Animals
10
Safe Haven Inc
Animals
11
North Bay Animal Services
Animals
12
Safe Harbor Animal Sanctuary

Protect and rescue abandoned and at-risk animals.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Albemarle Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Inc; the most unlike its peers is Rude Ranch Animal Rescue 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, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 13 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LOUISIANA SPCA: $112,000 · OtherLOUISIANA SPCAHUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER: $52,000 · OtherHUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTERHUMANE SOC OF US: $26,000 · OtherHUMANE SOC OF USIndividual grant recipient: $16,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+1 more: $2,000 · OtherRUDE RANCH ANIMAL RESCUE INC: $40,000 · AnimalsRUDE RANCH ANIMAL RESCUE INCTHE HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER & MONROE COUNTY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO: $40,000 · AnimalsTHE HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER & MONROE…ETOSHA RESCUE & ADOPTION CENTER: $20,000 · AnimalsETOSHA RESCUE & ADOPTION CENTERALBEMARLE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS INC: $5,000 · AnimalsHumane Society of Tampa Bay Inc: $5,000 · Animals+3 more: $7,000 · Animals+3 more
Other$208,000Animals$117,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetRUDE RANCH ANIMAL RESCUE INC: $40,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetTHE HUMANE SOCIETY OF ROCHESTER & MONROE COUNTY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO: $40,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetALBEMARLE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS INC: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHumane Society of Tampa Bay Inc: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF LINCOLN COUNTY: $3,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetNEBRASKA HUMANE SOCIETY: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPAWS CHICAGO: $2,000 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.

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 FoundationWA3.3× affinity4 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 Irene C Evans Charity Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Irene C Evans Charity Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 Irene C Evans Charity Trust?

    Find your warmest path to Irene C Evans Charity Trust 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 13 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Irene C Evans Charity’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