Skip to content
Merrill & Patricia Kirsch Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Merrill & Patricia Kirsch Charitable Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$39k
Granted FY2024still arriving
8
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$26k
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 2024.

Education$217kHealth$15kReligion$9kPhilanthropy$4kCivil Rights$2kHuman Services$2k
02FY2024 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $26k
$2,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$592k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HOLY FAMILY CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL$25,500
RIDGEVIEW FOUNDATION WACONIA$3,000
ST JOSEPH CATHOLIC SCHOOL$2,500
SAINT PAUL SEMINARY$2,500
CATHOLIC SHOOLS CENTER OF EXELLENCE$2,000
STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS$2,000
SHARING & CARING HANDS INC$1,000
MAYO CLINIC$500
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 (FY22–24, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 5%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 12% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%ALPHA WOMEN'S CENTER: $6k → 5%ALPHA WOMEN'S CENTER: $5k → 5%SHARING & CARING HANDS INC: $1k → 11%SHARING & CARING HANDS: $500 → 11%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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$229k · 7 repeat orgs$18k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +33% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
5

Total granted

$229k
$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
+14%

Still filing today

43%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHealthEducationCivil RightsOther
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

  • CS
    CATHOLIC SCHOOLS CENTER OF EXCELLENCE
    3× · 2022–2024 · $5k · revenue +7%
  • STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION
    3× · 2022–2024 · $5k · revenue +83%
  • SA
    SHARING AND CARING HANDS INC
    2× · 2022–2024 · $2k · revenue +33%

Funded once

  • AW
    ALPHA WOMENS CENTER
    one grant, 2023 · $11k · revenue -9%
  • EH
    ENKRATEIA HOUSE OF HOPEgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $2k · revenue +37%
  • PA
    Pro-Life Action Ministries Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $1k · revenue +14%
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
Pregnancy Center Solutions

Our mission is to provide immediate, visible and free access to Pregnancy Center Services for Women experiencing a Crisis Pregnancy. Pregnancy Center Services include free ultrasounds, pregnancy testing, compassionate counsel, fetal…

Human Services
2
St John Paul Ii Life Center

To provide natural integrated ob-gyn healthcare, fertilitycare, and pregnancy help services for all women while honoring life.

Health
3
Life Choice Center

To provide christian based outreach to clients by providing services and information free of charge to anyone in a crisis pregnancy situation, with the goal of assisting the client to carry the pregnancy to term and with continued care…

Health
4
Crisis Pregnancy Center of the Treasure Coast

To defend life, to meet physical, social and spiritual needs of those who may be experiencing a crisis pregnancy, to bring healing and wholeness to lives traumatized by abortion, to present the gospel of jesus christ, and to challenge the…

Health
5
Lifechoice Pregnancy Care Center

To provide support to unplanned pregnancies.

—
6
Options Pregnancy Clinic

Orginizations mission to provide free pregnancy/parenting services to women and their familes facing unplanned pregnancies, and to provide limited std testing and treatment. to offer compassionate assistance regarding sexual integrity,…

Health
7
Hope Life Center Inc

Our mission at hope life center is to reach the community with the gospel of jesus christ by meeting physical, emotional and spiritual needs of women, men and their unborn children.

Human Services
8
Pregnancy Care Centers Dba Network of Life

The organization strives to empower those most vulnerable to abortion to choose life by offering free medical interventions and support services to those facing an unintended pregnancy. it serves the community with a robust wellness…

Health
9
Life Choice Care Center Inc

To provide physical and emotional support to women and their families facing unplanned pregnancies through a christ centered and biblically based approach.

Human Services
10
Pregnancy Care Center of Lagrange Inc

Pregnancy care center of lagrange is a christ-centered ministry providing medical and educational services to those facing unplanned pregnancies, encouraging sexual integrity, and empowering individuals to make life affirming choices.

Health
11
Sacramento Life Center Inc

The Sacramento Life Center compassionately offers judgment-free support, resources, and free medical services to materially and emotionally equip women and families facing an unplanned or unsupported pregnancy to uphold and honor the value…

Health
12
My Choices Pregnancy Help Clinic Inc

An outreach ministry committed to presenting the gospel of jesus christ to women with crisis pregnancies in both word and deed.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Students for Life of America Inc; the most unlike its peers is Alpha Womens Center. 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

9 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. 9 of the 14 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HOLY FAMILY CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL: $131,500 · OtherHOLY FAMILY CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOLST JOSEPH CATHOLIC SCHOOL: $75,000 · OtherST JOSEPH CATHOLIC SCHOOL+4 more: $14,000 · Other+4 moreALPHA WOMENS CENTER: $11,000 · Human ServicesSHARING AND CARING HANDS INC: $1,500 · Human ServicesCATHOLIC SCHOOLS CENTER OF EXCELLENCE (CSCOE): $5,000 · EducationSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EducationENKRATEIA HOUSE OF HOPE: $1,500 · HealthMAYO CLINIC: $1,500 · HealthElevate Life: $1,000 · HealthStudents for Life of America Inc: $1,000 · Civil Rights
Other$220,500Human Services$12,500Education$10,000Health$4,000Civil Rights$1,000

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 budgetALPHA WOMENS CENTER: $11,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetCATHOLIC SCHOOLS CENTER OF EXCELLENCE (CSCOE): $5,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSHARING AND CARING HANDS INC: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetENKRATEIA HOUSE OF HOPE: $1,500 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetMAYO CLINIC: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPro-Life Action Ministries Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetStudents for Life of America Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetElevate Life: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Catholic Community Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Catholic Community Foundation of MinnesotaMN15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Catholic Community Foundation of Minnesota · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Merrill & Patricia Kirsch Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Merrill & Patricia Kirsch Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    1report 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 14 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Merrill & Patricia Kirsch’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