Skip to content
Martha D & Herbert F Schingoethe Endowment Trust Old Second Natl Bank Tr at a glance

· Private foundation

Martha D & Herbert F Schingoethe Endowment Trust Old Second Natl Bank Tr

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.

$645k
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
9
States reached
$277k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Arts & Culture$2.2MInternational$1.4MReligion$780kEducation$322kFood & Nutrition$120kCommunity Improvement$120kHealth$105kHuman Services$75kOther$0
02FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $25k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $208k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $135k
  • $250k+1 grant · $277k
$20,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$4.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AURORA UNIVERSITY SCHINGOETHE CENTE$277,116
CHURCH OF THE CITY$135,000
NASHVILLE ANTI-HUMAN TRAFFICKING$45,000
ETHNOS360 INC$31,800
VILLAGE OF HOPE$20,800
CONVOY OF HOPE$20,000
CAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST$20,000
CENTRAL MISSIONARY CLEARINGHOUSE$20,000
SEND INTERNATIONAL$20,000
OAK COTTAGE FOR WOMEN$15,000
ONE GENERATION$15,000
ENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTITUTE IN CHINA$5,000
RADIUS INTERNATIONAL$5,000
SHELTERING WINGS CENTER$5,000
GRACEWORKS MINISTRIES$5,000
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 (FY25–25, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 4%, 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%GRACEWORKS MINISTRIES: $5k → 4%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
CA
CO
MO
MD
AZ
TN
TX
FL
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.

60%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.3M · 3 repeat orgs$2.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +36% since the first grant, against +16% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
15

Total granted

$3.3M
$1.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+16%

Still filing today

33%
53%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 8% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $572k 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
InternationalEducationCommunity ImprovementCrime & LegalHuman ServicesHealthOther
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

  • AL
    AURORA LATIN AMERICAN CLUB INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.2M · revenue +36%
  • VO
    VILLAGE OF HOPE INC
    2× · 2022–2025 · $1.0M · revenue -49% · 36% of their budget
  • EI
    ETHNOS360 INC
    2× · 2022–2025 · $42k

Funded once

  • GW
    GRACE WORKS INC
    one grant, 2022 · $300k
  • CO
    CHURCH OF THE CITY
    one grant, 2022 · $300k
  • WR
    WORLD RELIEF CORP OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALSgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $250k · revenue +62%
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
International Needs

International needs has the vision to transform lives and change communities by helping christian nationals serve both god and neighbor within their own countries.

—
2
Refugees International Inc

Refugees international advocates for lifesaving assistance, human rights, and protection for displaced people and promotes solutions to displacement crisis.

International
3
Floresta Usa Incorporated

Plant with purpose, a christian nonprofit organization, reverses deforestation and poverty around the world by transforming the lives of the rural poor. we do this through: - watershed restoration & regenerative agriculture - savings…

International
4
International Committee of the Red Cross

The international committee of the red cross (switzerland)(icrc) is an impartial, neutral, and independent organization whose exclusively humanitarian mission is to protect the lives and dignity of victims of armed conflict and of violence…

International
5
International Crisis Group

Crisis group works to prevent and resolve deadly conflict around the world by informing and influencing the perceptions and actions of policymakers and other key conflict actors. to this end, we endeavour to talk to all sides and provide…

International
6
Women's Refugee Commission Inc

To improve the lives and protect the rights of women, children and youth displaced by conflict and crisis. the women's refugee commission envisions a world in which refugees are safe, healthy and reliant and seeks to drive change in…

Human Services
7
Inter-America Mission
—
8
Charity Global Inc

Charity: water is a non-profit organization bringing clean and safe water to people around the world. continued on schedule o.

Human Services
9
International Refugee Assistance Project Inc

Irap is a global legal aid and advocacy organization working to create a world where refugees and all people seeking safety are empowered to claim their right to freedom of movement and a path to lasting refuge. everyone should have a safe…

Human Services
10
Catholic Charities of Louisville Inc

Catholic charities of louisville serves people in need, especially the poor and oppressed. consistent with the principles of catholic social teaching, we build bridges of hope, mercy, and justice as we accompany struggling families and…

Human Services
11
International Development Enterprises

See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.

International
12
The Inter-American Restoration Corp

Economic & social development primarily in, but not limited to, honduras and central america.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Convoy of Hope; the most unlike its peers is Franklin Noon Rotary Charitable Foundation Inc. 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 32 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/17
Grantees still filing
6/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AURORA LATIN AMERICAN CLUB INC: $2,238,611 · OtherAURORA LATIN AMERICAN CLUB INCGRACE WORKS INC: $300,000 · OtherGRACE WORKS INCCHURCH OF THE CITY: $300,000 · OtherCHURCH OF THE CITYAURORA UNIVERSITY SCHINGOETHE CENTE: $277,116 · OtherAURORA UNIVERSITY SCHINGOETHE CENTEGIEF: $200,000 · OtherCHURCH OF THE CITY: $135,000 · Other+13 more: $501,800 · Other+13 moreVILLAGE OF HOPE INC: $1,020,800 · InternationalVILLAGE OF HOPE INCWORLD RELIEF CORP OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS: $250,000 · InternationalWORLD RELIEF CORP OF NATION…+4 more: $50,000 · InternationalFRANKLIN NOON ROTARY CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC: $100,000 · Community ImprovementGrace International Educational Fdn: $53,500 · ReligionARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $20,250 · EducationAMERICAN INDIAN COLLEGE FUND: $20,000 · EducationFLORENCE IMMIGRANT & REFUGEE RIGHTS PROJECT INC: $20,000 · Crime & LegalGRACEWORKS MINISTRIES INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesHOPE CLINIC FOR WOMEN: $5,000 · Health
Other$3,952,527International$1,320,800Community Improvement$100,000Religion$53,500Education$40,250Crime & Legal$20,000Human Services$5,000Health$5,000

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 budgetVILLAGE OF HOPE INC: $1,020,800 over 2y, 36% of budgetWORLD RELIEF CORP OF NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF EVANGELICALS: $250,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFRANKLIN NOON ROTARY CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC: $100,000 over 1y, 30% of budgetGrace International Educational Fdn: $53,500 over 1y, 13% of budgetARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $20,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN INDIAN COLLEGE FUND: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCentral Missionary Clearinghouse Inc: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFLORENCE IMMIGRANT & REFUGEE RIGHTS PROJECT INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOAK COTTAGE FOR WOMEN INC: $15,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetGRACEWORKS MINISTRIES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRADIUS INTERNATIONAL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHOPE CLINIC FOR WOMEN: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetENGLISH LANGUAGE INSTITUTE IN CHINA: $5,000 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.

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.

Servant FoundationThe Community Foundat…Christian Community F…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Renaissance Charitabl…Natl Christian Charit…Raymond James Charita…Vanguard Charitable E…American Endowment Fo…Donor Advised Charita…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…
Servant FoundationKS17.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Servant Foundation · The Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee Inc · Christian Community Foundation Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 Martha D & Herbert F Schingoethe Endowment Trust Old Second Natl Bank Tr funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Martha D & Herbert F Schingoethe Endowment Trust Old Second Natl Bank Tr. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 67%
  • World Relief Corp of National Association of Evangelicals: 67% of 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)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 32 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 Martha D & Herbert F Schingoethe Endowment Trust Old Second Natl Bank Tr’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