Skip to content
Jean Thomas Lambert Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Jean Thomas Lambert Foundation

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.

$80k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Environment$445kReligion$239kEducation$87kPhilanthropy$46kRecreation & Sports$30kArts & Culture$23kYouth Development$18kHuman Services$16kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$106k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
1)THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$50,000
2)CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST (CRU)$20,000
5)CRESTED BUTTE AVALANCHE CENTER$5,000
3)AIARE$2,500
6)JOHNS ISLAND COMMUNITY$1,500
4)INDIAN RIVER LAND TRUST$1,000
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 (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 71% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%VERO BEACH MUSEUM OF ART: $7k → 12%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST (CRU): $25k → 13%AIARE: $30k → 10%COLORADO MESA UNIVERSITY: $15k → 11%COVERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK: $23k → 13%1)THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $50k → 17%6)VERO BEACH MUSEUM OF ART: $7k → 12%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST (CRU): $25k → 13%AIARE: $15k → 10%COVERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK: $21k → 13%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $30k → 17%VERO BEACH MUSEUM OF ART: $7k → 12%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST (CRU): $25k → 13%AIARE: $15k → 10%COVERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK: $20k → 13%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $30k → 17%2)CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST (CRU): $25k → 13%AIARE: $15k → 10%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $30k → 17%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST (CRU): $22k → 13%7)AIARE: $10k → 10%COVERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK: $20k → 13%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $30k → 17%CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST (CRU): $22k → 13%UNITED WAY OF SUMMIT COUNTY: $13k → 13%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $25k → 17%2)CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST (CRU): $20k → 13%CRESTED BUTTE AVALANCHE CT: $13k → 10%UNITED WAY OF SUMMIT COUNTY: $10k → 13%1)THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $15k → 17%9)CRESTED BUTTE AVALANCHE CENTER: $10k → 10%OHIO AND ERIE CANALWAY COALITION: $20k → 13%McKEE BOTANICAL GARDEN: $15k → 12%5)OHIO AND ERIE CANALWAY COALITION: $20k → 13%McKEE BOTANICAL GARDEN: $10k → 12%UNITED WAY OF SUMMIT COUNTY: $13k → 13%McKEE BOTANICAL GARDEN: $10k → 12%3)ST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $12k → 13%McKEE BOTANICAL GARDEN: $10k → 12%OHIO AND ERIE CANALWAY COALITION: $13k → 13%ST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $10k → 13%INDIAN RIVER LAND TRUST: $7k → 12%UNITED WAY OF SUMMIT COUNTY: $10k → 13%ST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $10k → 13%OHIO AND ERIE CANALWAY COALITION: $10k → 13%ST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $10k → 13%ST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $10k → 13%ST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $10k → 13%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 21% of Jean Thomas Lambert Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Jean Thomas Lambert Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 18% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$676k · 15 repeat orgs$116k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +36% since the first grant, against +31% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
15

Total granted

$676k
$107k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+31%

Still filing today

40%
27%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentArts & CulturePhilanthropyOther
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

  • CF
    CONSERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK
    4× · 2019–2022 · $83k · revenue +20%
  • OE
    OHIO & ERIE CANALWAY COALITION
    5× · 2020–2024 · $68k · revenue +459%
  • MB
    MCKEE BOTANICAL GARDEN INC
    5× · 2019–2023 · $50k · revenue +36%

Funded once

  • TA
    THE AKRON GARDEN CLUB
    one grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue -26%
  • CM
    COLORADO MESA UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2019 · $15k
  • CB
    CRESTED BUTTE AVALANCHE CT
    one grant, 2021 · $13k
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
West Creek Conservancy

Our mission is to enrich the lives of all people in northeast ohio by conserving natural habitats, restoring the ecological value of our region's lands and waters, and expanding opportunities to connect people from all cultures to…

Environment
2
Chagrin River Watershed Partners Inc

Preserving and enhancing the scenic and environmental quality of the ecosystem of the chagrin river, lake erie and other ohio watersheds in a manner which assures a sustainable future for people, plants and animals.

Human Services
3
Huron Pines Resource Conservation & Development Council Inc

It is our mission at huron pines to conserve and enhance northern michigan's natural resources to ensure healthy water, protected places and vibrant communities. for alomst 50 years, our work across the forests, lakes and streams of…

Environment
4
Lancaster County Conservancy

The mission of the lancaster county conservancy is "providing wild and forested lands and clean waterways for our community forever". the charitable purposes of the lancaster county conservancy include preservation of natural lands,…

Environment
5
Western Reserve Land Conservancy

Land conservation and restoration for public benefit

Environment
6
Erie Marsh Conservation Foundation
Environment
7
Lake Erie Islands Conservancy

Encourage conservation & protection of natural & agricultural lands in the lake erie islands for the benefit of this & future generations through purchase of land & sponsorship of programs & walks at these preserves.

Environment
8
Delaware and Lehigh National Heritage Corridor Inc

See schedule oper the bylaws of the delaware & lehigh national heritage corridor(which were updated by the merged board of the national canal musuem and the d&l), our mission is to work with government entities, non-profit organizations…

Arts & Culture
9
Concerned Citizens of Portage Lake

Portage Lake environment preservation

Environment
10
Winous Point Marsh Conservancy

To assure the protection and stewardship of one of ohio's largest wetlands; to facilitate wetland conservation and restoration efforts in the more than 15,000 acres contiguous to and including the conservancy property; to increase research…

Environment
11
The Ohio Environmental Council

To protect the environment and health of all ohio communities through legal and policy advocacy, decision-maker accountability, and civic engagement.

Environment
12
Coalition to Protect Michigan Resources

The coalition to protect michigan resources's mission is to be a strong voice for the equitable co-management of michigan's fisheries, with both the great lakes and inland lakes and streams, to insure that conservation principles remain in…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Conservancy for Cuyahoga Valley National Park; the most unlike its peers is Akron Art Museum. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

11 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. 11 of the 34 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $145,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYCAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST INC: $119,500 · OtherCAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST INCAIARE: $75,000 · OtherAIARE1)THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $65,000 · Other1)THE NATURE CONSERVANCYST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $50,000 · OtherST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH2)CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST (CRU): $45,000 · Other2)CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST (CRU)+19 more: $153,925 · Other+19 moreCONSERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK: $83,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVANCY FOR CUYA…MCKEE BOTANICAL GARDEN INC: $50,000 · EnvironmentMCKEE BOTANICAL GARD…THE AKRON GARDEN CLUB: $15,000 · EnvironmentTHE AKRON GARDEN CLU…INDIAN RIVER LAND TRUST INC: $12,500 · EnvironmentINDIAN RIVER LAND TR…+2 more: $6,500 · EnvironmentOHIO & ERIE CANALWAY COALITION: $68,000 · Arts & CultureAKRON ART MUSEUM: $2,500 · Arts & CultureUNITED WAY OF SUMMIT AND MEDINA: $46,000 · Philanthropy
Other$653,425Environment$167,000Arts & Culture$70,500Philanthropy$46,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $145,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCONSERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK: $83,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetOHIO & ERIE CANALWAY COALITION: $68,000 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetMCKEE BOTANICAL GARDEN INC: $50,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetUNITED WAY OF SUMMIT AND MEDINA: $46,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetJOHN'S ISLAND COMMUNITY SERVICE LEAGUE INC: $15,500 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetTHE AKRON GARDEN CLUB: $15,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetINDIAN RIVER LAND TRUST INC: $12,500 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetLAKE ERIE FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetAKRON ART MUSEUM: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCROWN POINT ECOLOGY CENTER: $1,500 over 1y, 0.3% 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 THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVANCY FOR CUYAHOGA VALLEY NATIONAL PARK ↗
  • Who funds OHIO & ERIE CANALWAY COALITION ↗
  • Who funds MCKEE BOTANICAL GARDEN INC ↗
  • Who funds UNITED WAY OF SUMMIT AND MEDINA ↗
  • Who funds JOHN'S ISLAND COMMUNITY SERVICE LEAGUE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE AKRON GARDEN CLUB ↗
  • Who funds INDIAN RIVER LAND TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds LAKE ERIE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds AKRON ART MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds CROWN POINT ECOLOGY CENTER ↗

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.

The Richard S and Ali…The Welty Family Foun…Gar FoundationAkron Community Found…The Bruce & Erica Gre…Lehner Family Foundat…Sisler McFawn Foundat…Burton D Morgan Found…Firstenergy FoundationAmerican Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…Vanguard Charitable E…
The Richard S and Alita Rogers Family FoundationFL15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Richard S and Alita Rogers Family Foundation · The Welty Family Foundation · Gar Foundation · Akron Community Foundation · The Bruce & Erica Greer Family Foundation · Lehner Family Foundation · Sisler McFawn Foundation Pfdn · Burton D Morgan Foundation Inc · Firstenergy Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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 Thomas Lambert Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jean Thomas Lambert Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Indian River Land Trust Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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 Jean Thomas Lambert Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Jean Thomas Lambert Foundation 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 34 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 Thomas Lambert’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