Skip to content

· Private foundation

Jean L Potter Fdtn

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.

$662k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

International$1.6MHealth$986kHousing & Shelter$941kReligion$401kCrime & Legal$373kEducation$320kCommunity Improvement$250k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $81k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $581k
$50,775
Median grant
7
States reached
$8.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WORLD VISION INC$200,000
DOOR OF HOPE$141,082
GOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION$135,949
PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES$52,960
AFRICAN ENTERPRISE$50,775
WORLD CHALLENGE$21,184
BILLY GRAHAM EVANGELISTIC ASSOCIATION$20,000
CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST$16,550
CHRISTIAN HEALING MINISTRY$13,500
WYCLIFFE ASSOCIATES INC$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 (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 63% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%GOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION: $145k → 11%DOOR OF HOPE: $141k → 14%WORLD CHALLENGE INC: $25k → 12%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRISTINTL: $65k → 13%CHRISTIAN HEALING MINISTRY: $15k → 14%WORLD CHALLENGE: $21k → 9%WORLD VISION INC: $200k → 9%PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $60k → 4%GOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION: $136k → 11%DOOR OF HOPE: $130k → 14%WORLD CHALLENGE INC: $20k → 12%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRISTINTL: $50k → 13%CHRISTIAN HEALING MINISTRY: $15k → 14%WORLD CHALLENGE INC: $18k → 9%WORLD VISION INC: $170k → 9%PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $53k → 4%GOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION: $130k → 11%DOOR OF HOPE: $125k → 14%WORLD CHALLENGE INC: $20k → 12%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRISTINTL: $50k → 13%CHRISTIAN HEALING MINISTRY: $14k → 14%WORLD CHALLENGE INC: $15k → 9%WORLD VISION INC: $170k → 9%PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $50k → 4%GOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION: $125k → 11%DOOR OF HOPE: $125k → 14%WORLD CHALLENGE INC: $15k → 12%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRISTINTL: $50k → 13%WORLD VISION INC: $170k → 9%PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $50k → 4%GOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION: $125k → 11%AFRICAN ENTERPRISE: $43k → 14%WORLD CHALLENGE INC: $15k → 12%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRISTINTL: $50k → 13%WORLD VISION INC: $165k → 9%PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $50k → 4%GOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION: $125k → 11%AFRICAN ENTERPRISE: $35k → 14%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRISTINTL: $45k → 13%PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $45k → 4%GOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION: $100k → 11%AFRICAN ENTERPRISE: $35k → 14%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST: $17k → 13%PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $40k → 4%GOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION: $100k → 11%AFRICAN ENTERPRISE: $35k → 14%PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $25k → 4%AFRICAN ENTERPRISE: $30k → 14%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

WA
PA
CA
CO
VA
NC
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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.4M · 10 repeat orgs$37k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
2

Total granted

$3.4M
$37k

Still filing today

50%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $37k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthCrime & LegalReligionInternationalOther
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 SHEPHERD REHABILITATION NETWORK
    8× · 2018–2025 · $986k · revenue +23%
  • DO
    DOOR OF HOPE
    8× · 2018–2025 · $941k · revenue +183%
  • PF
    PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES
    8× · 2018–2025 · $373k · revenue +51%

Funded once

  • BG
    BILLY GRAHAM EVANGELISTIC ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2025 · $20k
  • CC
    CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST
    one grant, 2025 · $17k
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
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 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)
6/6
Grantees still filing
6/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DOOR OF HOPE: $941,082 · OtherDOOR OF HOPECAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRISTINTL: $320,000 · OtherCAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRISTINTLAFRICAN ENTERPRISE: $177,500 · OtherAFRICAN ENTERPRISEWORLD CHALLENGE INC: $149,184 · OtherWORLD CHALLENGE INCBILLY GRAHAM EVANGELISTIC ASSC: $145,000 · OtherBILLY GRAHAM EVANGELISTIC ASSCWYCLIFFE ASSOCIATES INC: $72,500 · Other+2 more: $36,550 · OtherWORLD VISION INC: $1,475,000 · InternationalWORLD VISION INCAFRICAN ENTERPRISE INC: $145,775 · InternationalAFRICAN ENTERPRISE INCGOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION NETWORK: $985,949 · HealthGOOD SHEPHERD REHABILI…PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $372,960 · Crime & LegalCHRISTIAN HEALING MINISTRIES INC: $73,500 · Religion
Other$1,841,816International$1,620,775Health$985,949Crime & Legal$372,960Religion$73,500

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWORLD VISION INC: $1,475,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetGOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION NETWORK: $985,949 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetDOOR OF HOPE: $941,082 over 8y, 3.9% of budgetPRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES: $372,960 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetAFRICAN ENTERPRISE INC: $145,775 over 3y, 14% of budgetCHRISTIAN HEALING MINISTRIES INC: $73,500 over 8y, 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.

  • Who funds WORLD VISION INC ↗
  • Who funds GOOD SHEPHERD REHABILITATION NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds DOOR OF HOPE ↗
  • Who funds PRISON FELLOWSHIP MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds AFRICAN ENTERPRISE INC ↗
  • Who funds CHRISTIAN HEALING MINISTRIES INC ↗

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.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO7.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Jean L Potter Fdtn funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jean L Potter Fdtn. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    1report 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.

    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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Jean L Potter Fdtn’s filings →

    More from the funding graph