Skip to content

· Private foundation

Larry Paul Fleschner Charitable Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$135k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$35k
Largest
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$150kHealth$122kEnvironment$93kCrime & Legal$93kCivil Rights$63kHuman Services$57kYouth Development$48kReligion$34kOther$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $128k
$15,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$2.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$35,400
Chances & Services for Youth$35,000
Pride Center of Terre Haute$17,500
Susie's Place$15,000
Vigo County Educational Foundation$15,000
Mission Doctors Association$10,000
The Seeing Eye$5,000
Sorensen Magnet School of the Arts & Humanities$1,500
Coeur d'Alene Library$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.

US giving: 88% of grant dollars ($671k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 12% that went abroad ($93k) is mapped below.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY21–25, $81k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 94% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%The Seeing Eye: $5k → 4%Pride Center of Terre Haute: $18k → 19%Pride Center of Terre Haute: $15k → 19%Pride Center of Terre Haute: $10k → 19%Pride Center of Terre Haute: $10k → 19%Pride Center of Terre Haute: $10k → 19%Council on Domestic Abuse: $6k → 19%Council on Domestic Abuse: $5k → 19%Council on Domestic Abuse: $3k → 19%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.

Beyond the US: 12% of all-years giving ($93k)

1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Peru$93k · 3 grants
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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 14% of Larry Paul Fleschner Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 78% of the giving stays in IN; by stated purpose, 66%.

Larry Paul Fleschner Charitable Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 12% 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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$631k · 14 repeat orgs$125k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +49% since the first grant, against +20% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
6

Total granted

$631k
$77k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+49%
+20%

Still filing today

71%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $48k 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
Human ServicesYouth DevelopmentHealthCommunity ImprovementAnimalsEducationOther
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

  • The Hendricks County Child Advocacy Center Inc
    6× · 2020–2025 · $93k · revenue +47%
  • TM
    THE MAPLE CENTER INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $92k · revenue +28% · 41% of their budget
  • PC
    Pride Center of Terre Haute Inc
    5× · 2021–2025 · $63k · revenue +568% · 61% of their budget

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $25k
  • RM
    Ronald McDonald House
    one grant, 2020 · $23k
  • AS
    Art Spaces Inc
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
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
Terre Haute Catholic Charities Foodbank Inc

The mission of Terre Haute Catholic Charities Foodbank is to feed the hungry in Clay, Greene, Knox, Parke, Sullivan, Vermillion and Vigo counties through a network of emergency food distribution member agencies and engage our community in…

Food & Nutrition
2
Catholic Charities Indianapolis Inc

The staff and volunteers of Catholic Charities Indianapolis are called by the Gospel to uphold the dignity of all people. Guided by Catholic social teaching, we consider it a privilege to deliver compassionate and caring service to help…

—
3
Terre Haute Area Chamber of Commerce Inc

The mission of the Terre Haute Chamber of Commerce is to preserve, protect, and promote a business friendly envrionment free of obstacles to growth and development.

—
4
Catholic Charities Bloomington Inc

Catholic Charities Bloomington is committed to enhancing the availability of quality mental health services in the communities it serves. We do this through the delivery of professional mental health education and counseling on a sliding…

—
5
Catholic Charities Counseling & Adoption Services of the Diocese of Erie Inc

Provide adoption, counseling services, and refugee assistance

—
6
Indiana Center for Prevention of Youth Abuse and Suicide

Child advocacy organization that focuses on the prevention of child sexual abuse and youth suicide.

Youth Development
7
Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Indianapolis Inc

Catholic Charities of Archdiocese of Indianapolis, Inc strives to live the gospel by embodying the compassion of Christ and exercising leadership in: advocating policies and action that protect human life and dignity, promoting awareness…

Religion
8
Humane Society of Clinton County Inc

To provide for the humane treatment of animals in clinton county, indiana

Animals
9
Vigo County Historical Society Inc

Education & Museum Operations

—
10
The Childrens Advocacy Center

Services to victims of child abuse.

Crime & Legal
11
The Julian Center Inc

The Julian Center provides emergency shelter, counseling, and outreach advocacy for victims of domestic violence, sexual assault, and rape.

Human Services
12
Meals on Wheels of Evansville Inc
Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Seeing Eye Inc; the most unlike its peers is Mission Doctors Association. 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

14 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. 14 of the 25 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
12/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Vigo County Educational Foundation: $132,500 · OtherVigo County Educational FoundationIndividual grant recipient: $57,509 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCHANCES AND SERVICES FOR YOUTH INC: $48,000 · OtherCHANCES AND SERVICES FOR YOUTH INCIndividual grant recipient: $35,400 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCatholic Charities Terre Haute Inc: $32,500 · OtherCatholic Charities Terre Haute IncCarmelite Monastery of Terre Haute: $28,597 · OtherCarmelite Monastery of Terre HauteIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientRonald McDonald House: $22,500 · OtherCITY OF COEUR D'ALENE: $20,000 · Other+8 more: $52,475 · Other+8 morePride Center of Terre Haute Inc: $62,500 · Human ServicesPride Center o…THE SEEING EYE INC: $20,600 · Human ServicesTHE SEEING EYE…COUNCIL ON DOMESTIC ABUSE INC: $13,125 · Human ServicesCOUNCIL ON DOM…The Hendricks County Child Advocacy Center Inc: $92,500 · Youth DevelopmentThe Hendricks…THE MAPLE CENTER INC: $91,580 · HealthTHE MAPLE CEN…TERRE HAUTE WOMEN'S CLUB INC: $11,000 · Community ImprovementTERRE HAUTE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $10,852 · AnimalsWABASH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 · Philanthropy
Other$454,481Human Services$96,225Youth Development$92,500Health$91,580Community Improvement$11,000Animals$10,852Philanthropy$7,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetThe Hendricks County Child Advocacy Center Inc: $92,500 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetTHE MAPLE CENTER INC: $91,580 over 5y, 41% of budgetPride Center of Terre Haute Inc: $62,500 over 5y, 61% of budgetCHANCES AND SERVICES FOR YOUTH INC: $48,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCatholic Charities Terre Haute Inc: $32,500 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetTHE SEEING EYE INC: $20,600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCOUNCIL ON DOMESTIC ABUSE INC: $13,125 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetTERRE HAUTE WOMEN'S CLUB INC: $11,000 over 4y, 13% of budgetTERRE HAUTE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $10,852 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetCANDLES: $10,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetWABASH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetIndiana State University Foundation Inc: $7,500 over 1y, 0.1% 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 Hendricks County Child Advocacy Center Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE MAPLE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds Pride Center of Terre Haute Inc ↗
  • Who funds CHANCES AND SERVICES FOR YOUTH INC ↗
  • Who funds Catholic Charities Terre Haute Inc ↗
  • Who funds THE SEEING EYE INC ↗
  • Who funds COUNCIL ON DOMESTIC ABUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds TERRE HAUTE WOMEN'S CLUB INC ↗
  • Who funds TERRE HAUTE HUMANE SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds CANDLES ↗
  • Who funds Mission Doctors Association ↗
  • Who funds WABASH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Indiana State University Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds Eastside Christian Academy 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.

Wabash Valley Community Foundation IncIN24.1× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Wabash Valley Community Foundation Inc · Max L Gibson & Jacqueline Gibson Foundation · Gregory L Gibson Charitable Foundation Inc · Duke Energy Foundation · Frederick R Benson Trust · The George F and Marion D Johnson Charitable Trust · Clara Fairbanks Foundation Inc · Round Room Gives Inc · Lilly Endowment Inc · Hollie & Anna Oakley Foundation Inc · United Way of the Wabash Valley Inc · Thompson Thrift Foundation Inc

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 Larry Paul Fleschner Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Larry Paul Fleschner Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–10%
    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 25 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 Larry Paul Fleschner’s filings →

    More from the funding graph