How much did JOHN E FETZER INSTITUTE INC grant in FY2025?

Philanthropy$12MEducation$9.3MHuman Services$8.8MPublic Benefit$7.3MInternational$6.1MReligion$5.6MArts & Culture$4.6MSocial Science$2.3MCommunity Improvement$2.0MOther$29M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2019

wingsmindjdrfteachingsstrengthencontemporaryscholarships

2020

due financialfinancial hardshiphardship covidcovid pandemicbusinessplatformcreate large

2021

spirituality todaycopingtogetherquestion educationeducation curriculumyouth empowermentuniverisity

2022

common goodoutreachreunited stateslearnfellows spiritualhealthy mindsadvancing

2023

bipoc-led racialjustice praxispraxis participationcolorfaith spiritualitylab'swildlife

2024

black indigenousindigenous colorcolor spiritualconnectiongatherings blackcohort blackspiritual innovators

2025

intergenerationalstulberg internationalinternational stringstring competitionkamsc parentvalley gleanerslions

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2025 · 248 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

Under $10k174 grants · $204k
$10k–50k33 grants · $492k
$50k–250k33 grants · $5.2M
$250k+8 grants · $6.5M

$1,000

Median grant

States reached

$830M

Total assets

Largest grants

WORLD CONFERENCE OF RELIGIONS FOR PEACE$2,350,000
PVBLIC FOUNDATION$2,000,000
INNER-CITY MUSLIM ACTION NETWORK$500,000
ON BEING PROJECT$500,000
INNER VISIONS INSTITUTE FOR SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL$300,000
2164 INC$300,000
NEW DISABLED SOUTH INC$250,000
UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY$250,000
INTER-RELIGIOUS FOUNDATION FOR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION INC$245,000
MILPA$200,000
LIGHTHOUSE FOUNDATION OF CHICAGOLAND$200,000
MISSION TALK INC$200,000
PILLARS FUND$200,000
CENTER FOR COMMUNITY CHANGE$200,000
BVM CAPACITY BUILDING INSTITUTE$200,000

02The need

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY18–25, $8.8M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 10%. 80% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$70M · 427 repeat orgs$17M to everyone else

427 repeat relationships — 156 still active in FY2025, 271 since wound down; 62 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

427

382

Total granted

$70M

$12M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%

+63%

Still filing today

51%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5.1M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationArts & CultureHuman ServicesPhilanthropyReligionInternationalOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

WC
WORLD CONFERENCE OF RELIGIONS FOR PEACE
6× · 2020–2025 · $4.1M · revenue +92%
KALAMAZOO COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
8× · 2018–2025 · $2.6M · revenue +84%
ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS
3× · 2019–2022 · $2.4M · revenue +151%

Funded once

NEW VENTURE FUNDgraduated
one grant, 2024 · $500k · revenue +85%
GF
GUERRAND-HERMES FOUNDATION FOR PEACE
one grant, 2022 · $440k
FM
FAITH MATTERS NETWORK COLLABORATIVE
one grant, 2024 · $385k · revenue -2% · 25% of their budget

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

International Peace Institute Inc

The international peace institute is an independent, non-profit organization working to strengthen inclusive multilateralism for a more peaceful and sustainable planet. through its research, convening, and strategic advising, ipi provides…

International

Fielding Graduate University

Fielding provides doctoral, master's and graduate-level certificate programs in the fields of educational leadership, organization development, and psychology.

—

Boston Architectural College

Founded 131 years ago, the boston architectural college is a recognized institution providing excellence in practice-integrated design education to members of diverse communities with students representing 35 countries. the bac offers…

—

Central Indiana Corporate

The central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is transforming our regional economy, bringing together the ceos of central indiana's largest and most civically engaged employers and university presidents to advance "big picture"…

Community Improvement

Foreign Policy Research Institute

Highest quality scholarship and nonpartisan policy analysis focused on u.s. foreign policy

International

Witness Inc

Witness helps people use video and technology to protect and defend human rights. the organization operates globally. witness' global team designs solutions, provides guidance, and co-develops strategies that enable human rights defenders…

International

Center for Religion and Diplomacy Inc

Bridging religious considerations with global peacebuilding policy and practice

International

Augustana College

Offer a challenging education that develops the qualities of mind, spirit and body for students.

Education

Arbor Research Collaborative for

To improve patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice.

Health

National Council of Jewish Women

Inspired by jewish values, the national council of jewish women is a grassroots organization of volunteers and advocates who strive for social justice by improving the quality of life for women, children, and families, and by safeguarding…

Community Improvement

American Jewish World Service Inc

We work to realize human rights and end poverty in africa, asia, latin america and the caribbean.

International

Regent University

Regent University serves as a center of Christian thought and action to provide excellent education through a Biblical perspective and global context equipping Christian leaders to change the world.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Holistic Underground Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Whitewater. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 33 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.2% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.2%1/522

the rest of the field

11%

206,163/1,819,043

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

451 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

158

Early backer (in before they grew)

444/451

Grantees still filing

343/451

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$37,643,374Philanthropy$12,397,888Education$9,326,274Human Services$8,795,998Public Benefit$7,312,400International$6,113,641Religion$5,615,542

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Kalamazoo Community FoundationMI112.4× affinity69 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Kalamazoo Community Foundation · Dorothy U Dalton Foundation Inc · Irving S Gilmore Foundation · Harold and Grace Upjohn Foundation · Tyler-Little Family Foundation · Marvin and Rosalie Okun Foundation · Suzanne Upjohn Delano Parish Foundation · The Burdick-Thorne Foundation · United Way of South Central Michigan · The Ronda E Stryker and William D · Jim Gilmore Jr Foundation · WK Kellogg Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organisation JOHN E FETZER INSTITUTE INC funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

18get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. An association, not a claim that your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: PASTORAL CARE AND COUNSELING INSTITUTE.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

high risk

~3 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 6 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

6 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up +91% since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 237412477 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on PASTORAL CARE AND COUNSELING INSTITUTE, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 3 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 76% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to John E Fetzer Institute Inc?

Find your warmest path to John E Fetzer Institute Inc through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

JOHN E FETZER INSTITUTE INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

451 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to John E Fetzer Institute Inc?

More from the funding graph

JOHN E FETZER INSTITUTE INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

451 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to John E Fetzer Institute Inc?

More from the funding graph