Skip to content
Meagel Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Meagel Charitable Trust

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.

$1.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$122k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$2.5MEducation$2.0MHuman Services$1.8MRecreation & Sports$1.5MReligion$983kArts & Culture$654kHousing & Shelter$492k
02FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$61,071
Median grant
3
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PARKS SYSTEM TRUST FUND$122,143
WHEELING SCTY FOR CRIPPLED CHILDREN$122,143
TRINITY LUTHERAN$122,143
WEST LIBERTY UNIVERSITY FDN$122,143
WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FDN$61,071
AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION$61,071
SALVATION ARMY$61,071
ENDOWMENT FOR KING'S DAUGHTERS$61,071
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY$61,071
LIONS CLUB OF WHEELING$61,071
HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER$61,071
WHEELING SYMPHONY SOCIETY INC$61,071
WV NORTHERN COMMUNITY COLLEGE FDN$61,071
CHILDREN'S HOME OF WHEELING$61,071
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE OHIO VA$61,071
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 (FY17–25, $983k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%CHILDREN'S HOME OF WHEELING: $67k → 15%HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER: $67k → 15%HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER: $61k → 15%CHILDREN'S HOME OF WHEELING: $61k → 15%CHILDREN'S HOME OF WHEELING: $60k → 15%HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER: $60k → 15%CHILDREN'S HOME OF WHEELING: $59k → 15%HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER: $59k → 15%HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER: $55k → 15%CHILDREN'S HOME OF WHEELING: $55k → 15%CHILDREN'S HOME OF WHEELING: $53k → 15%HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER: $53k → 15%HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER: $47k → 15%CHILDREN'S HOME OF WHEELING: $47k → 15%HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER: $46k → 15%CHILDREN'S HOME OF WHEELING: $46k → 15%HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER: $44k → 15%CHILDREN'S HOME OF WHEELING: $44k → 15%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.
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$9.9M · 17 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

17 repeat relationships: 16 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
0

Total granted

$9.9M
$0

Still filing today

41%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
HealthHuman ServicesArts & CultureEducationOther
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

  • WL
    WEST LIBERTY UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $983k · revenue +57%
  • WH
    WHEELING HEALTH RIGHT INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $492k · revenue +100%
  • WS
    WHEELING SYMPHONY SOCIETY INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $492k · revenue +50%

Funded once

    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
    04the grantee network

    7 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. 7 of the 17 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)
    3
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    7/7
    Grantees still filing
    7/7
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    PARKS SYSTEM TRUST FUND: $1,012,840 · OtherPARKS SYSTEM TRUST FUNDWHEELING SCTY FOR CRIPPLED CHILDREN: $983,356 · OtherWHEELING SCTY FOR CRIPPLED CHILDRENWEST LIBERTY UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $983,356 · OtherWEST LIBERTY UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INCTRINITY LUTHERAN: $983,355 · OtherTRINITY LUTHERANWV NORTHERN COMMUNITY COLLEGE FDN: $491,678 · OtherWV NORTHERN COMMUNITY COLLEGE FDNENDOWMENT FOR KING'S DAUGHTERS: $491,677 · OtherENDOWMENT FOR KING'S DAUGHTERSLIONS CLUB OF WHEELING: $491,677 · OtherLIONS CLUB OF WHEELINGSALVATION ARMY: $491,677 · OtherSALVATION ARMYAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $491,677 · OtherAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETYCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE OHIO VA: $329,784 · Other+1 more: $161,893 · OtherWHEELING HEALTH RIGHT INC: $491,678 · HealthWHEELING HE…American Heart Association Inc: $491,677 · HealthAmerican He…THE HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER INC: $491,677 · Human ServicesTHE HOUSE O…THE CHILDRENS HOME OF WHEELING INC: $491,677 · Human ServicesTHE CHILDRE…WHEELING SYMPHONY SOCIETY INC: $491,678 · Arts & CultureWEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $491,677 · Education
    Other$6,912,970Health$983,355Human Services$983,354Arts & Culture$491,678Education$491,677

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

    25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWEST LIBERTY UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $983,356 over 9y, 4.6% of budgetWHEELING HEALTH RIGHT INC: $491,678 over 9y, 1.9% of budgetWHEELING SYMPHONY SOCIETY INC: $491,678 over 9y, 5.6% of budgetTHE HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER INC: $491,677 over 9y, 7.6% of budgetWEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $491,677 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CHILDRENS HOME OF WHEELING INC: $491,677 over 9y, 4.3% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $491,677 over 9y, 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 WEST LIBERTY UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
    • Who funds WHEELING HEALTH RIGHT INC ↗
    • Who funds WHEELING SYMPHONY SOCIETY INC ↗
    • Who funds THE HOUSE OF THE CARPENTER INC ↗
    • Who funds WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
    • Who funds THE CHILDRENS HOME OF WHEELING INC ↗
    • Who funds American Heart Association 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.

    Albert Schenk III & K…Community Foundation …Amazonsmile Foundation
    Albert Schenk III & Kathleen H Schenk Charitable TrustWV15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Albert Schenk III & Kathleen H Schenk Charitable Trust · Community Foundation for the Ohio Valley Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation

    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 Meagel Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Meagel Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

    2025
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%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
      0get 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 17 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 Meagel’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