Skip to content
Pax Am Foundation Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Pax Am Foundation 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.

$161k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$131k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0183% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$682kYouth Development$252kReligion$62kFood & Nutrition$11kRecreation & Sports$9kHuman Services$8kEmployment$4kEnvironment$4kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k13 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $17k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $131k
$500
Median grant
3
States reached
$2.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THOREAU COLLEGE$131,000
YOUTH INITIATIVE HIGH SCH$16,750
THRESHOLD CARE CIRCLE$3,000
RED OAK OUTDOOR SCHOOL$2,500
LIVING FAITH FOOD PANTRY$2,500
PLEASANT RIDGE WALDORF SCHOOL$2,180
Individual grant recipient$1,000
ADULT TEEN CHALLENGE$500
ORGANIC EYE$250
LAKOTA WALDORF SCHOOL$250
VALLEY STEWARSHIP NETWORK$250
AQUINAS ACADEMY$250
CRAWFORD STEWARDSHIP PROJECT$250
JOE WAS JUST JOE$250
KGAP$250
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 (FY20–24, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%PORT MINISTRIES: $1k → 14%PORT MINISTRIES: $500 → 14%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

MN
IL
WI
MA
SD
IA
IN
VA
DC
GA
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.0M · 29 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

29 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

29
22

Total granted

$1.0M
$24k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+45%

Still filing today

45%
32%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k 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
Food & NutritionEnvironmentEducationArts & CultureMembership BenefitHuman ServicesOther
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

  • TC
    THOREAU COLLEGE INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $663k · revenue +8% · 41% of their budget
  • PR
    PLEASANT RIDGE SCHOOL INC
    5× · 2017–2025 · $8k · revenue +46%
  • CI
    COULEECAP INC
    4× · 2020–2024 · $2k · revenue +43%

Funded once

  • CC
    CHRISTIAN CENTER INC
    one grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue 0%
  • CC
    CODMAN COMMUNITY FARMS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +329%
  • SC
    SU CASA CATHOLIC WORKES COMMUNITY
    one grant, 2020 · $3k
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
The Land Institute

When people, land, and community are as one, all three members prosper; when they relate not as members but as competing interests, all three are exploited. by consulting nature as the source and measure of that membership, the land…

—
2
Omaha Permaculture

Omaha Permaculture fosters community through sustainable land stewardship.

—
3
Fairshare Csa Coalition

To promote community supported agriculture (csa) in wisconsin and strive to ensure that all families have access to locally produced, organic food and have strong connections to their farms, food, and community.

Food & Nutrition
4
Organic Farmers Association

The mission of the Organic Farmers Association is to provide a strong and unified national voice for domestic certified organic producers so that organic agriculture will become the basis of a viable United States food and agricultural…

Food & Nutrition
5
Wisconsineye Public Affairs Network Inc

To keep state residents educated and informed, in a nonpartisan manner, on a broad range of wisconsin public issues and policy matters.

Arts & Culture
6
Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont

The northeast organic farming association of vermont promotes organic practices to build an ecomnomically viable, ecologically sound and socially just vermont agricultural system that benefits all living things.

Arts & Culture
7
Door County Land Trust Inc

The door county land trust is a local, non-governmental non-profit organization whose mission is to preserve door county's exceptional lands and waters forever.

Environment
8
Organic Farm School

As a learning center, the organic farm school trains new farmers to develop and manage farms focused on ecological, economic and social regeneration - simultaneously offerring opportunities for our community and others to learn about their…

Education
9
South Dakota Corn Growers Association

Promote corn and corn products and improve corn profitability. influence public policy and increase corn usage through livestock feeding and new domestic products.

—
10
Midwest Dairy Association

Midwest dairy works with others to give consumers an excellent dairy experience increasing sales, fostering innovation, and inspiring consumer confidence of dairy products and practices.

—
11
Wisconsin Land and Water Conservation Association Inc

To protect, conserve, and enhance wisconsin's natural resources by advocating for and supporting county conservation efforts, for current and future generations.

Environment
12
Cooperative Network

Promote, represent & advocate for the cooperative way of doing business

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wolakota Waldorf Society; the most unlike its peers is The Port Ministries. 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

21 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. 21 of the 53 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)
20/21
Grantees still filing
13/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THOREAU COLLEGE INC: $662,876 · EducationTHOREAU COLLEGE INC+2 more: $8,640 · EducationYOUTH INITIATIVE HIGH SCH: $249,951 · OtherYOUTH INITIATIVE HIGH SCHST PETER'S CHURCH: $54,250 · OtherST PETER'S CHURCH+37 more: $56,908 · Other+37 moreCODMAN COMMUNITY FARMS INC: $5,000 · Food & NutritionORGANICEYE INC: $1,100 · Food & NutritionTHE CORNUCOPIA INSTITUTE INC: $1,000 · Food & NutritionTHE WESTON A PRICE FOUNDATION: $750 · Food & NutritionCHRISTIAN CENTER INC: $5,000 · ReligionBeyond Pesticides: $1,500 · EnvironmentVALLEY STEWARDSHIP NETWORK INC: $1,250 · EnvironmentLAND STEWARDSHIP PROJECT: $750 · EnvironmentCRAWFORD STEWARDSHIP PROJECT LTD: $500 · EnvironmentCOULEECAP INC: $2,000 · Membership BenefitThe Port Ministries: $1,500 · Human Services
Education$671,516Other$361,109Food & Nutrition$7,850Religion$5,000Environment$4,000Membership Benefit$2,000Human Services$1,500

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 budgetTHOREAU COLLEGE INC: $662,876 over 6y, 41% of budgetPLEASANT RIDGE SCHOOL INC: $8,390 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetCHRISTIAN CENTER INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCODMAN COMMUNITY FARMS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetWOLAKOTA WALDORF SOCIETY: $2,250 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCOULEECAP INC: $2,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetBeyond Pesticides: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetThe Port Ministries: $1,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetVALLEY STEWARDSHIP NETWORK INC: $1,250 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetORGANICEYE INC: $1,100 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetSHRINE OF OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CORNUCOPIA INSTITUTE INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLAND STEWARDSHIP PROJECT: $750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WESTON A PRICE FOUNDATION: $750 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF SAN LUCAS: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCRAWFORD STEWARDSHIP PROJECT LTD: $500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetINNOVATIVE SCHOOLS NETWORK INC: $500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMINNESOTA PUBLIC RADIO AMERICAN PUBLIC MEDIA: $270 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILY FARM DEFENDERS INCORPORATED: $250 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetWISCONSIN PUBLIC RADIO ASSOCIATION INC: $120 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.

  • Who funds THOREAU COLLEGE INC ↗
  • Who funds PLEASANT RIDGE SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds CHRISTIAN CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds CODMAN COMMUNITY FARMS INC ↗
  • Who funds WOLAKOTA WALDORF SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds COULEECAP INC ↗
  • Who funds Beyond Pesticides ↗
  • Who funds The Port Ministries ↗
  • Who funds VALLEY STEWARDSHIP NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds ORGANICEYE INC ↗
  • Who funds SHRINE OF OUR LADY OF GUADALUPE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE CORNUCOPIA INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds LAND STEWARDSHIP PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds THE WESTON A PRICE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF SAN LUCAS ↗
  • Who funds CRAWFORD STEWARDSHIP PROJECT LTD ↗
  • Who funds INNOVATIVE SCHOOLS NETWORK 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.

The Chicago Community…Vanguard Charitable E…Network for GoodNational Philanthropi…Natl Christian Charit…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Chicago Community TrustIL10.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Pax Am Foundation Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Pax Am Foundation Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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
    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 53 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 Pax Am’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