Skip to content

· Private foundation

Minchen-Beville Foundation Xxxxx5005

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$90k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$59k
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 2025.

Philanthropy$346kHuman Services$230kHealth$48k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $31k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $59k
$16,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEXAS METHODIST FOUNDATION$59,000
GEORGETOWN CARING PLACE$16,000
FAITH IN ACTION GEORGETOWN$15,000
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 (FY18–25, $42k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%FAITH IN ACTION GEORGETOWN: $15k → 6%FAITH IN ACTION GEORGETOWN: $12k → 6%FAITH IN ACTION GEORGETOWN: $5k → 6%FAITH IN ACTION GEORGETOWN: $5k → 6%FAITH IN ACTION GEORGETOWN: $3k → 6%FAITH IN ACTION GEORGETOWN: $2k → 6%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.
$624k · 8 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
0

Total granted

$624k
$0

Still filing today

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementHealthOther
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

  • GC
    GEORGETOWN CARING PLACE
    3× · 2020–2025 · $48k · revenue +14%
  • FI
    FAITH IN ACTION GEORGETOWN
    6× · 2018–2025 · $42k · revenue +37%
  • CE
    Casa Esperanza Inc
    4× · 2019–2023 · $36k · revenue +128%

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

    5 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. 5 of the 8 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.

    1
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    1
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    4/5
    Grantees still filing
    3/5
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    TEXAS METHODIST FOUNDATION: $346,000 · OtherTEXAS METHODIST FOUNDATIONWESLEYAN HOMES INC: $71,998 · OtherWESLEYAN HOMES INCGEORGETOWN COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER: $37,000 · OtherGEORGETOWN COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTERGEORGETOWN COMMUNITY CENTER: $32,000 · OtherGEORGETOWN COMMUNITY CENTERGEORGETOWN CARING PLACE: $48,000 · Community ImprovementFAITH IN ACTION GEORGETOWN: $41,500 · Human ServicesCasa Esperanza Inc: $35,900 · HealthSYMPHONY OF SOUL: $11,700 · Arts & Culture
    Other$486,998Community Improvement$48,000Human Services$41,500Health$35,900Arts & Culture$11,700

    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 budgetWESLEYAN HOMES INC: $71,998 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetGEORGETOWN CARING PLACE: $48,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetFAITH IN ACTION GEORGETOWN: $41,500 over 6y, 2.5% of budgetCasa Esperanza Inc: $35,900 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetSYMPHONY OF SOUL: $11,700 over 3y, 30% 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 WESLEYAN HOMES INC ↗
    • Who funds GEORGETOWN CARING PLACE ↗
    • Who funds FAITH IN ACTION GEORGETOWN ↗
    • Who funds Casa Esperanza Inc ↗
    • Who funds SYMPHONY OF SOUL ↗

    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.

    Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: 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 Minchen-Beville Foundation Xxxxx5005 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Minchen-Beville Foundation Xxxxx5005. 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%1%3%4%5%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 · 0–5%
      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.
      05Through Plinth

      Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

      How do I get to Minchen-Beville Foundation Xxxxx5005?

      Find your warmest path to Minchen-Beville Foundation Xxxxx5005 through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

      Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

      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 8 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 Minchen-Beville Foundation Xxxxx5005’s filings →

      More from the funding graph