Skip to content

· Private foundation

Lillian R Coleman Xxxxx2007

Its FY2026 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$139k
Granted FY2026still arriving
70
Grants FY2026still arriving
6
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2026.

Education$1.2MEmployment$1kOther$0
02FY2026 · 70 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$2.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$2,800
Individual grant recipient$2,800
Individual grant recipient$2,250
Individual grant recipient$2,250
Individual grant recipient$2,250
Individual grant recipient$2,150
Individual grant recipient$2,150
Individual grant recipient$2,150
Individual grant recipient$2,150
Individual grant recipient$2,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
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 (FY18–26) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 89% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%MCKENZIE BOSCHERT: $2k → 18%LEXI MORRIS: $2k → 8%KENDRA BUCKLEY: $2k → 5%BRILEY MUNCHEL: $2k → 8%TRINE UNIVERSITY: $4k → 9%AUNDREA BERKEMEIER: $2k → 11%INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS COLLEGE AND VET: $2k → 12%JAYCE CROWDER: $2k → 15%NICHOLAS PAVEY: $2k → 15%MADISON WEBB: $2k → 16%INDIANA UNIVERSITY - EAST: $21k → 18%INDIANA UNIVERISTY: $24k → 18%CYNTHIA TUSH: $2k → 19%BALL STATE UNIVERSITY: $10k → 19%PURDUE UNIVERSITY: $13k → 19%MOLLY ZACHERY: $2k → 12%ARACELI LEON: $2k → 15%TARYN RODGERS: $2k → 14%WILLAIM E KUHN: $2k → 19%BRODY: $2k → 9%CARLIE KUHN: $2k → 11%BRIAN SIMMERMON: $2k → 15%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN INDIANA: $4k → 15%IVY TECH COMMUNITY COLLEGE: $6k → 18%Indiana University Bloomington: $7k → 18%BENJAMIN MEANS: $2k → 19%ROCHELLE MEYERS: $3k → 19%KYLEE MACY: $3k → 19%NATALIE ROSE COOPER: $2k → 9%MARIAN UNIVERSITY: $9k → 16%MATTHEW CAMERON: $2k → 18%REGAN PADGETT: $2k → 18%ASHLEY WHITHAM: $2k → 19%SAVANNAH WESTPHAL: $2k → 19%TRISHA MORGAN: $2k → 9%REBECCA MUIR: $2k → 16%JACOB CROWDER: $2k → 18%KYLEE HERBERT: $2k → 18%BROOKLYN NEWBOLD: $2k → 19%MORGAN BEARD: $2k → 19%WESLEY MAUZY: $2k → 19%LOGAN E BEARD: $2k → 16%KYLE STANLEY: $2k → 18%EMME FIELDS: $2k → 18%DONNA FRAZIER: $2k → 19%KONNER PARSLEY: $2k → 19%CLAIRE WAITS: $2k → 16%DUSTIN KING: $2k → 18%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
MI
NY
IN
OH
CA
UT
KY
OK
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.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$805k · 190 repeat orgs$398k to everyone else

190 repeat relationships: 41 still active in FY2026, 149 since wound down; 29 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

190
183

Total granted

$805k
$342k

Still filing today

0%
6%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $56k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    6× · 2020–2026 · $10k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    4× · 2023–2026 · $9k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    4× · 2023–2026 · $8k

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $24k
  • IU
    Indiana University School of Medicine
    one grant, 2018 · $21k
  • TO
    TRUSTEES OF PURDUE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2018 · $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
Otterbein University

Otterbein University is an inclusive community dedicated to educating the whole person in the context of humane values. Our mission is to prepare graduates to think deeply and broadly, to engage locally and globally, and to advance their…

Education
2
Benedictine University

Benedictine University is an inclusive academic community dedicated to teaching and learning, scholarship and service, truth and justice, as inspired by the Catholic intellectual tradition, the social teaching of the Church, and the…

Education
3
Walsh University Inc

Walsh university is an independent, coeducational catholic, liberal arts and sciences institution dedicated to educating its students to become leaders in service to others through a values-based education with an international perspective…

Education
4
Nebraska Wesleyan University

Nebraska wesleyan university is an academic community dedicated to intellectual and personal growth within the context of a liberal arts education and in an environment of christian concern.

Education
5
Excelsior University

Excelsior University provides educational opportunity to adult learners with an emphasis on those historically underrepresented in higher education. The University meets students where they are - academically and geographically, offering…

Education
6
Loyola University

Loyola University New Orleans, a Jesuit and Catholic institution of higher education, welcomes students of diverse backgrounds and prepares them to lead meaningful lives with and for others; to pursue truth, wisdom, and virtue; and to work…

Education
7
St Marys University of Minnesota

Enriched by the lasallian catholic heritage, saint mary's university of minnesota awakens, nurtures, and empowers learners to ethical lives of service and leadership.

Education
8
Marquette University

As a Catholic, Jesuit university our mission is to search for truth, discover shareknowledge, foster personal professional excellence, promote a life of faith and developleadership expressed in service to others. See Schedule O.

Education
9
Saint Xavier University

Saint xavier university, a catholic institution inspired by the heritage of the sisters of mercy, educates persons to search for truth, think critically, communicate effectively and serve wisely and compassionately in support of human…

Education
10
Doane University

Doane university creates distinctive educational experiences, immersed in the liberal arts, to prepare our students for careers and lives grounded in inquiry, ethics, and a commitment to lead and serve in the global community.

Education
11
Taylor University

The mission of Taylor University is to develop servant-leaders marked with a passion to minister Christ's redemptive love, grace, and truth to a world in need.

Education
12
Endicott College

Endicott college offers students a vibrant academic environment that remains true to its founding principle of integrating professional and liberal arts with experiential learning. for more information see schedule o.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is University of Indianapolis; the most unlike its peers is Hobart Institute of Welding Technology. 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

11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 402 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
9/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

+197 more: $890,500 · Other+197 moreMarian University: $9,000 · EducationTrine University: $4,100 · EducationUniversity of Indianapolis: $3,844 · Education
Other$890,500Education$16,944

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMarian University: $9,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTrine University: $4,100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUniversity of Indianapolis: $3,844 over 1y, 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 Marian University ↗

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.

American Online Giving Foundation IncDE7.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving 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 Lillian R Coleman Xxxxx2007 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lillian R Coleman Xxxxx2007. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%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 · 0–20%
    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 402 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Lillian R Coleman Xxxxx2007’s filings →

    More from the funding graph