Skip to content

· Private foundation

Paxton-Mitchell Charitable

Its FY2021 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$327k
Granted FY2021
1
Grants FY2021
1
States reached
$327k
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 2021.

Philanthropy$328kEducation$11kHuman Services$5kRecreation & Sports$2k
02FY2021 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$326,766
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AL & MARCIE CAMPBELL FOUNDATION$326,766
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–21) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 5% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%AMERICAN LEGION: $2k → 7%AL & MARCIE CAMPBELL FOUNDATION: $327k → 8%Platte Peer Group: $205 → 9%CREIGHTON UNIVERSITY: $11k → 12%Git-R-Done: $4k → 13%HILLTOPPERS BASEBALL: $1k → 12%Unviersity of Nebraska Foundation: $2k → 13%MAKE-A-WISH: $250 → 12%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 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
Hugo W Moser Research Institute At Kennedy Krieger Inc

The hugo w. moser research institute at kennedy krieger, inc. (the "research institute") is an internationally recognized research facility finding answers to problems and injuries that affect a child's developing brain. researchers have…

Science & Tech
2
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
3
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o

Health
4
Blood Cancer United Inc

Our mission is to cure leukemia, lymphoma, hodgkin's disease and myeloma, and improve the quality of life of patients and their families.

Health
5
The Broad Institute Inc

The mission of the broad institute is to propel progress in biomedicine, through research aimed at the understanding and treatment of disease and the dissemination of scientific knowledge to the scientific community to benefit the public.…

Health
6
American Diabetes Association

The mission of the American Diabetes Association is to prevent and cure diabetes and to improve the lives of all people affected by diabetes.

Health
7
American Lung Association

The american lung association's mission is to save lives by improving lung health and preventing lung disease. we do this through education, advocacy, and research.

Health
8
The Heart Foundation

The heart foundation (thf) was created to save lives from heart disease by increasing awareness, educating the public, and supporting innovative research at smidt heart institute at cedars-sinai medical center in los angeles, california.…

Philanthropy
9
Baylor Research Institute

To improve the care and well being of our community, nationally and internationally, through innovative clinically relevant research that is consistent with the mission, vision and values of Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH).

Health
10
Children's Health Care

We champion the health needs of children and families. we are committed to improving children's health by providing the highest-quality, family centered care, advanced through research and education.

Health
11
Diabetes Technology Society

To facilitate research into the treatment, monitoring, diagnosis and prevention of diabetes.

Health
12
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc

Susan g. komen has an unmatched, comprehensive 360-degree approach to fighting breast cancer across all fronts and supporting millions of people in the u.s. and in countries worldwide. we advocate for policies to protect patients, drive…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hope Center for Kids Inc; the most unlike its peers is Platte Peer Group. 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

8 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.

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)
7/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AL & MARCIE CAMPBELL FOUNDATION: $326,766 · OtherAL & MARCIE CAMPBELL FOUNDATION+5 more: $8,350 · OtherCreighton University: $11,000 · EducationPLATTE PEER GROUP: $205 · Recreation & Sports
Other$335,116Education$11,000Recreation & Sports$205

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 budgetCreighton University: $11,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPLATTE PEER GROUP: $205 over 1y, 0.1% 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 Creighton University ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN LEGION 154 ↗
  • Who funds PLATTE PEER GROUP ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Paxton-Mitchell Charitable funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Paxton-Mitchell Charitable. 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
    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 · 0–5%
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Paxton-Mitchell Charitable?

    Find your warmest path to Paxton-Mitchell Charitable 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Paxton-Mitchell’s filings →

    More from the funding graph