Skip to content

· Public charity

Ohio State Council Knights of Columbus

Established to provide charitable, religious, and educational programs available to everyone.

$781k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$298k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$2.1MReligion$847kRecreation & Sports$360kHealth$73kHuman Services$56kCivil Rights$48kEducation$6k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $425,097, the rows itemized in this filing. The $780,859 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $355,762 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $24k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $103k
  • $250k+1 grant · $298k
$9,931
Median grant
1
States reached
$627k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
OHIO CHARITY FOUNDATION INC$297,683
SPECIAL OLYMPICS OHIO$103,469
ARC OF OHIO IN MERCER COUNTY$9,931
MARION COUNTY BOARD OF DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES$7,268
THE ARC OF OHIO$6,746
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 (FY17–19, $32k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 18% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%ARC OF MERCER COUNTY: $7k → 13%Deepwood Foundation: $5k → 9%Lucy Idol Center: $8k → 11%LUCY IDOL CENTER: $6k → 11%Heinzerling Memorial Foundation: $6k → 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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 73% of Ohio State Council Knights of Columbus’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 99% of the giving stays in OH; by stated purpose, 26%.

Ohio State Council Knights of Columbuslessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.5M · 14 repeat orgs$29k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
5

Total granted

$3.5M
$29k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+61%

Still filing today

50%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • OC
    OHIO CHARITY FOUNDATION INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $2.1M · revenue +29% · 95% of their budget
  • SO
    SPECIAL OLYMPICS OHIO INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $360k · revenue +10%
  • TA
    THE ARC OF OHIO INC
    6× · 2018–2025 · $48k · revenue +723%

Funded once

  • TA
    THE ARC OF MERCER COUNTY
    one grant, 2019 · $7k · revenue -96%
  • SA
    SAINT AMBROSE PARISH
    one grant, 2024 · $6k
  • HC
    HEINZERLING COMMUNITYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $6k · revenue +73%
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
Arc Group Employment Services

To provide employment opportunities to central ohioans with developmental disabilities.

Employment
2
The Arc of the Capital Area

We empower central texans with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their families through compassionate case management and innovative programs.

—
3
The Arc of Crawford County Inc

The ARC of Crawford County, Inc. advocates for the rights of citizens with intellectual and developmental disabilities and enhances their lives by promoting maximum independence and affording them opportunities for enrichment.

—
4
Southeastern Ohio Center for Independent Living

Provide services to people with disabilities. such services include assistance with housing, employment, transportation and recreational issues.

Human Services
5
The Arc of the Mid Ohio Valley Inc

Mission is to promote and advocate for the welfare of people with intellectual and other developmental disabilities.

—
6
The Arc of Northwest Wayne County

To provide advocacy & services that promote integration & participation in all aspects of life in the northwest wayne county community for children & adults with developmental disabilities.

—
7
Arc Services of Macomb Inc

The organization specializes in providing services to individuals with disabilities primarily through vocational, social, educational and residential programs.

—
8
The Arc of Lancaster County

Empowering people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (i/dd) and their families to lead full, satisfying, independent lives of their choice.

Health
9
The Arc of Columbia County-Portage

The arc of columbia county shall exist to work for the well-being of all persons with developmental and related disabilities, regardless of race, creed or color, by promoting quality of life through the advocacy for education of people…

Human Services
10
Arch Inc

Make known the gifts of people with developmental disabilities, revealed through mutually transforming relationships. To foster an environment in community that responds to the changing needs of our members, while being faithful to the…

Human Services
11
The Arc Community Advocates

We exist as an advocacy organization to make it possible for each person with a developmental disability to participate fully in all aspects of community and to support the effort of each individual to determine their own future.

Human Services
12
The Arc of Colorado

The arc of colorado provides individual and systems change advocacy for persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities (idd) residing in colorado and their families.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Arc of Ohio Inc; the most unlike its peers is Ohio Charity 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.
05the grantee network

11 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. 11 of the 19 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OHIO CHARITY FOUNDATION INC: $2,107,369 · PhilanthropyOHIO CHARITY FOUNDATION INCCATHOLIC DIOCESE OF COLUMBUS: $409,641 · OtherCATHOLIC DIOCESE OF COLUMBUSSPECIAL OLYMPICS OHIO INC: $359,856 · OtherSPECIAL OLYMPICS OHIO INCTHE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF TOLEDO: $144,494 · OtherTHE CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF TOLEDOARCHDIOCESE OF CINCINNATI: $121,700 · OtherARCHDIOCESE OF CINCINNATIDIOCESE OF YOUNGSTOWN: $100,592 · OtherDIOCESE OF YOUNGSTOWNCATHOLIC DIOCESE OF CLEVELAND HEALTH BENEFIT TRUST AGREEMENT: $51,678 · OtherTHE ARC OF OHIO INC: $48,171 · Other+7 more: $121,070 · Other+7 moreLUCY IDOL CENTER INC: $14,202 · Human ServicesTHE ARC OF MERCER COUNTY: $6,969 · Human ServicesHEINZERLING COMMUNITY: $5,843 · Human ServicesDEEPWOOD FOUNDATION: $5,125 · Human Services
Philanthropy$2,107,369Other$1,357,202Human Services$32,139

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetOHIO CHARITY FOUNDATION INC: $2,107,369 over 8y, 95% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS OHIO INC: $359,856 over 8y, 1.0% of budgetTHE ARC OF OHIO INC: $48,171 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetDIOCESE OF CLEVELAND FACILITIES SERVICES CORPORATION: $36,816 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetARC OF OHIO IN MERCER COUNTY: $21,272 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetHATTIE B COOPER COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $18,757 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetLUCY IDOL CENTER INC: $14,202 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetHEINZERLING COMMUNITY: $5,843 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR DISABILITY SERVICES: $5,357 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetDEEPWOOD FOUNDATION: $5,125 over 1y, 0.4% 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 OHIO CHARITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS OHIO INC ↗
  • Who funds THE ARC OF OHIO INC ↗
  • Who funds DIOCESE OF CLEVELAND FACILITIES SERVICES CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds ARC OF OHIO IN MERCER COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds HATTIE B COOPER COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds LUCY IDOL CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds THE ARC OF MERCER COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds HEINZERLING COMMUNITY ↗
  • Who funds CENTER FOR DISABILITY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds DEEPWOOD FOUNDATION ↗

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.

Ohio Charity Foundation IncOH15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ohio Charity Foundation Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · American Endowment Foundation · 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 Ohio State Council Knights of Columbus funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ohio State Council Knights of Columbus. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%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
    4report 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 Ohio State Council Knights of Columbus?

    Find your warmest path to Ohio State Council Knights of Columbus 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 19 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 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 Ohio State Council Knights of Columbus’ filings →

    More from the funding graph