Skip to content

· Private foundation

Jenny H & Otto F Krauss Charitable 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.

$595k
Granted FY2025still arriving
20
Grants FY2025still arriving
9
States reached
$161k
Largest
01What it funds
0177% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$1.2MReligion$989kInternational$496kHealth$225kArts & Culture$211kAnimals$38kHuman Services$11kPhilanthropy$8kOther$0
02FY2025 · 20 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k16 grants · $420k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $161k
$25,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$8.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$161,000
GOOD SHEPHERD MINISTRIES$45,000
WORLD COMPASSION TLM INC$45,000
Individual grant recipient$35,000
Individual grant recipient$35,000
WORLD MISSIONS MINISTRIES$25,000
THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN$25,000
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY$25,000
ASSEMBLIES OF GOD$25,000
PURDUE UNIVERSITY$25,000
GEORGIA TECH$25,000
INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS$20,000
KIRTLAND COMMUNITY COLLEGE$20,000
DEPAUW UNIVERSITY$20,000
CRANBROOK SCHOOL$20,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 45% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 15%WORLD COMPASSION TLM INC: $50k → 15%INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $25k → 10%THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $30k → 14%MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: $30k → 16%CAMP WESTMINSTER: $35k → 21%ASSEMBLIES OF GOD: $25k → 15%NORTH RALEIGH UMC: $25k → 8%GEORGIA TECH: $30k → 13%DEPAUW UNIVERSITY: $25k → 10%PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $30k → 19%PULMONARY FIBROSIS FD: $35k → 14%WORLD COMPASSION TLM INC: $45k → 15%INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $25k → 10%THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $30k → 14%MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: $30k → 16%CAMP WESTMINSTER: $35k → 21%ASSEMBLIES OF GOD: $25k → 15%NORTH RALEIGH UMC: $25k → 8%GEORGIA TECH: $30k → 13%DEPAUW UNIVERSITY: $25k → 10%PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $30k → 19%PULMONARY FIBROSIS FD: $35k → 14%WORLD COMPASSION TLM INC: $43k → 15%INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $25k → 10%THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN: $25k → 14%MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: $25k → 16%CAMP WESTMINSTER: $30k → 21%ASSEMBLIES OF GOD: $25k → 15%GEORGIA TECH: $25k → 13%PULMONARY FIBROSIS FD: $30k → 14%WORLD COMPASSION TLM INC: $40k → 15%CAMP WESTMINSTER: $30k → 21%PULMONARY FIBROSIS FD: $30k → 14%WORLD COMPASSION TLM INC: $40k → 15%CAMP WESTMINSTER: $30k → 21%WORLD COMPASSION TLM INC: $38k → 15%CAMP WESTMINSTER: $30k → 21%WORLD COMPASSION TLM INC: $35k → 15%CAMP WESTMINSTER: $30k → 21%WORLD COMPASSION TLM INC: $35k → 15%CAMP WESTMINSTER: $30k → 21%WORLD COMPASSION TLM INC: $35k → 15%CHATELET ROBOTICS INITATIVE: $161k → 8%CHATELET ROBOTICS INITATIVE: $150k → 8%CHALELET ROBOTICS INITATIVE: $85k → 8%CHALELET ROBOTICS INITATIVE: $35k → 8%CHALELET ROBOTICS INITATIVE: $35k → 8%CHALELET ROBOTICS INITATIVE: $26k → 8%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
WI
MI
IN
CA
CO
MO
NC
OK
GA
TX
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.
$4.5M · 30 repeat orgs$136k to everyone else

30 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

30
10

Total granted

$4.5M
$125k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+106%

Still filing today

20%
10%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11k 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
ReligionEducationArts & CultureAnimalsEnvironmentOther
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

  • UO
    University of Michigan
    9× · 2017–2025 · $225k · revenue +202%
  • DePauw University
    9× · 2017–2025 · $195k · revenue +43%
  • BH
    BIG HEART MINISTRIES
    8× · 2017–2024 · $115k · revenue +67%

Funded once

  • IP
    INTERNATIONAL PENTECOSTAL HOLINESS CHURCH INC
    one grant, 2018 · $30k
  • WM
    WORLD MISSIONS MINISTRIES-GAILYA
    one grant, 2022 · $30k
  • WM
    WORLD MISSIONS MINISTRY
    one grant, 2017 · $30k
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
Asbury College

Asbury university equips students, through academic excellence and spiritual vitality, for lifelong learning, leadership, and service to the professions, society, the family and the church, preparing them to engage their cultures and…

Education
2
University of the Ozarks

True to our christian heritage, we prepare students from diverse religious, cultural, educational and economic backgrounds to live life fully.

Education
3
Erskine College and Theological Seminary

Erskine College exists to glorify God as a Christian academic community where students are equipped to flourish as whole persons for lives of service through the pursuit of undergraduate liberal arts and graduate theological education.

Education
4
Evangel University

Evangel is a comprehensive christian university that is committed to excellence in educating and equipping students to become spirit empowered servants of god who will impact the church and society globally.

Education
5
Institute for Conservation Leadership

To support healthy communities and a healthy earth, the institute for conservation leadership strengthens leaders, organizations, coalitions and networks.

Community Improvement
6
Illinois College

Illinois college is a co-educational institution of higher education learning providing a four-year educational program leading to the baccalaureate degree. illinois college is a community committed to the highest standards of scholarship…

Education
7
Grand View University

Engages, equips and empowers learners to explore their vocations, fulfill their potential and serve the world.

Education
8
Roberts Wesleyan University

As new york's leading university for character education, rwu is a community of learners committed to historic christianity which seeks to prepare thoughtful, spiritually mature, service-oriented people who will transform society.

Education
9
Xavier University

Xavier is a jesuit catholic university rooted in the liberal arts tradition. our mission is to educate each student intellectually, morally, and spiritually. we create learning opportunities through rigorous academic and professional…

Education
10
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

—
11
University of Virginia Investment Management Company

The university of virginia investment management company (uvimco) is organized to invest funds on behalf of the rector and visitors of the university of virginia (the university or uva) and university-associated organizations (uaos).

Education
12
Calvin University

The mission of calvin university is to equip students to think deeply, to act justly, and to live wholeheartedly as christ's agents of renewal in the world.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is InterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSA; the most unlike its peers is Samaritan's Purse. 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

9 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. 9 of the 43 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)
8/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GOOD SHEPHERD MINISTRIES: $362,500 · OtherGOOD SHEPHERD MINISTRIESWORLD COMPASSION TLM INC: $360,500 · OtherWORLD COMPASSION TLM INCIndividual grant recipient: $311,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $275,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $255,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $225,000 · OtherTRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITYMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY: $225,000 · OtherMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITYUniversity of Michigan: $225,000 · OtherUniversity of MichiganGEORGIA TECH: $225,000 · OtherGEORGIA TECHIndividual grant recipient: $217,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTHE GENERAL COUNCIL OF THE ASSEMBLIES OF GOD: $198,000 · OtherCRANBROOK SCHOOL: $185,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $145,500 · Other+22 more: $845,000 · Other+22 moreDePauw University: $195,000 · EducationINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $190,000 · Arts & CultureBIG HEART MINISTRIES: $115,000 · ReligionSAMARITAN'S PURSE: $10,000 · ReligionInterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSA: $5,000 · ReligionARK ASSOCIATION TO RESCUE KRITTERS: $38,000 · AnimalsROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $7,500 · PhilanthropyTHE KIVA CENTER: $7,000 · Environment
Other$4,054,500Education$195,000Arts & Culture$190,000Religion$130,000Animals$38,000Philanthropy$7,500Environment$7,000

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 budgetUniversity of Michigan: $225,000 over 9y, 12% of budgetDePauw University: $195,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $190,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetBIG HEART MINISTRIES: $115,000 over 8y, 4.2% of budgetARK ASSOCIATION TO RESCUE KRITTERS: $38,000 over 8y, 4.5% of budgetSAMARITAN'S PURSE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $7,500 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetTHE KIVA CENTER: $7,000 over 3y, 0.9% 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 University of Michigan ↗
  • Who funds DePauw University ↗
  • Who funds INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS ↗
  • Who funds BIG HEART MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds ARK ASSOCIATION TO RESCUE KRITTERS ↗
  • Who funds SAMARITAN'S PURSE ↗
  • Who funds ROSCOMMON COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE KIVA CENTER ↗
  • Who funds InterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSA ↗

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 FoundationWA2.1× 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 Jenny H & Otto F Krauss Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jenny H & Otto F Krauss Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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
    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 43 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 Jenny H & Otto F Krauss’ filings →

    More from the funding graph