Skip to content
John a Kozel Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

John a Kozel Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$20k
Granted FY2025still arriving
21
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

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

International$42kPublic Safety & Disaster$18kHuman Services$14kEducation$14kHealth$12kAnimals$10kRecreation & Sports$3kReligion$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 21 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$435k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ABUSED ADULT RESOURCE CENTER$1,500
MINISTRY ON THE MARGINS$1,500
HEARTVIEW FOUNDATION$1,500
AID INC$1,500
Individual grant recipient$1,500
FURRY FRIENDS ROCKIN RESCUE$1,000
YOUTHWORKS$1,000
CENTRAL DAKOTA HUMANE SOCIETY$1,000
ST JOSEPH INDIAN SCHOOL$1,000
ST BERNARD MISSION SCHOOL$1,000
CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES$1,000
SAN ALFONSO MISSION$1,000
DREAM CENTER BISMARCK$1,000
HEAVEN'S HELPER SOUP CAFE$1,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS USA$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:

Its human-services grants (FY24–25, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YOUTHWORKS: $1k → 10%YOUTHWORKS: $500 → 10%DREAM CENTER BISMARCK: $1k → 10%DREAM CENTER BISMARCK: $1k → 10%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

ND
MN
SD
CA
CO
MD
KS
DC
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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$122k · 27 repeat orgs$3k to everyone else

27 repeat relationships: 20 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

27
1

Total granted

$122k
$1k

Still filing today

63%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthInternationalAnimalsHuman ServicesEducationEnvironmentOther
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

  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $22k · revenue +39%
  • HF
    HEARTVIEW FOUNDATION
    6× · 2020–2025 · $7k · revenue +162%
  • CD
    CENTRAL DAKOTA HUMANE SOCIETY
    6× · 2020–2025 · $6k · revenue +58%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $1k
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
Catholic Charities North Dakota

Guided by our values, Catholic Charities North Dakota serves people in need and advocates for the common good of all.

—
2
Credit Union Association of the Dakotas

The association works to promote member credit unions as being safe and sound institutions for insured deposits, responsible lending, and the best place for consumers to receive financial services.

—
3
Methodist Children's Home

Methodist children's home equips children, youth, and families to flourish by offering hope through christian-centered relationships, services, and support.

Human Services
4
United Children's Services of Bennington County Inc

Children's services

Human Services
5
Catholic Charities of the Diocese of St Cloud

At Catholic Charities, we focus our efforts around three core pillars: Food Access, Mental Health and Housing. Guided by our mission - to serve and enhance human dignity for all people - we provide essential services and foster a sense of…

Human Services
6
Cardinal Hayes Home for Children

The organization provides compassionate care for disabled children and young adults. in the tradition of the franciscan missionaries of mary, a catholic order of religious women, serving those most in need, we share in a ministry of…

Human Services
7
Feeding South Dakota

To eliminate hunger in south dakota.

Food & Nutrition
8
Children's Physicians

Children's physicians delivers the highest quality pediatric primary care while supporting education and research.

Health
9
Skagit Hospice Foundation

To fund the program and services of hospice of the nothwest to ensure dignified and compassionate care is available to anyone coping with a life-limiting diagnosis.one size doesn't always fit all, especially when it comes to quality of…

Health
10
Regional West Health Services

Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.

Health
11
Marin Humane Society

Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.

Animals
12
Mary's Shelter

Believing in the value of every life, mary's path empowers vulnerable teen mothers in foster care and their babies to create lives of dignity, hope and self-sufficiency.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of North Dakota; the most unlike its peers is Brave the Shave. 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

17 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. 17 of the 29 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
8/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES: $18,000 · OtherCATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICESAMNESTY INTERNATIONAL: $6,000 · OtherAMNESTY INTERNATIONALABUSED ADULT RESOURCE CENTER: $5,500 · OtherABUSED ADULT RESOURCE CENTERAID INC: $5,500 · OtherAID INCSALVATION ARMY: $5,000 · OtherSALVATION ARMYST BERNARD MISSION SCHOOL: $5,000 · OtherST BERNARD MISSION SCHOOLST JOSEPHS INDIAN SCHOOL: $5,000 · OtherST JOSEPHS INDIAN SCHOOLND ELKS CAMP GRASSICK: $3,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $3,000 · Other+8 more: $9,100 · Other+8 moreMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $22,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES US…COMMON HOPE: $8,000 · InternationalCOMMON HOPECENTRAL DAKOTA HUMANE SOCIETY: $6,000 · AnimalsCENTRAL D…FURRY FRIENDS ROCKIN' RESCUE INC: $4,000 · AnimalsFURRY FRI…HEARTVIEW FOUNDATION: $6,500 · HealthBRAVE THE SHAVE: $1,000 · HealthZACHS FOUNDATION: $1,000 · HealthSAN ALFONSO MISSION: $3,500 · EducationDream Center Bismarck: $2,000 · Human ServicesMOUNTAIN PLAINS YOUTH WORKS: $1,500 · Human ServicesMinistry on the Margins: $2,500 · ReligionSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Environment
Other$65,100International$30,000Animals$10,000Health$8,500Education$3,500Human Services$3,500Religion$2,500Environment$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $22,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMON HOPE: $8,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHEARTVIEW FOUNDATION: $6,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCENTRAL DAKOTA HUMANE SOCIETY: $6,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetABUSED ADULT RESOURCE CENTER: $5,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFURRY FRIENDS ROCKIN' RESCUE INC: $4,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetSAN ALFONSO MISSION: $3,500 over 6y, 1.5% of budgetMinistry on the Margins: $2,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF NORTH DAKOTA: $2,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetDream Center Bismarck: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDS HOPE LEARNING CENTER: $1,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetMOUNTAIN PLAINS YOUTH WORKS: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBRAVE THE SHAVE: $1,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetZACHS FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetWOMENS CARE CENTER: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHERN LIGHTS COUNCIL OF THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA INC: $400 over 4y, 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.

  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds COMMON HOPE ↗
  • Who funds HEARTVIEW FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CENTRAL DAKOTA HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds ABUSED ADULT RESOURCE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds FURRY FRIENDS ROCKIN' RESCUE INC ↗
  • Who funds SAN ALFONSO MISSION ↗
  • Who funds Ministry on the Margins ↗
  • Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF NORTH DAKOTA ↗
  • Who funds Dream Center Bismarck ↗
  • Who funds CHILDS HOPE LEARNING CENTER ↗
  • Who funds MOUNTAIN PLAINS YOUTH WORKS ↗
  • Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BRAVE THE SHAVE ↗
  • Who funds ZACHS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WOMENS CARE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN LIGHTS COUNCIL OF THE BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA 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.

Blue Cross Blue Shiel…North Dakota Communit…Missouri Slope Areawi…The Tom and Frances L…Midcontinent Foundati…Aetna Foundation IncOtto Bremer TrustBnsf Railway Foundati…Great Plains Food BankThe Barry FoundationXcel Energy FoundationCharities Aid Foundat…
Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota Caring FoundationND30.3× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Blue Cross Blue Shield of North Dakota Caring Foundation · North Dakota Community Foundation · Missouri Slope Areawide United Way · The Tom and Frances Leach Foundation · Midcontinent Foundation · Aetna Foundation Inc · Otto Bremer Trust · Bnsf Railway Foundation · Great Plains Food Bank · The Barry Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America

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 John a Kozel Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from John a Kozel Charitable Trust. 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%13%25%38%50%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 · 0–50%
    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 29 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 John a Kozel’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