Skip to content
Peace Shalom Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Peace Shalom Foundation

Its FY2022 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$253k
Granted FY2022
40
Grants FY2022
4
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0163% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2022.

Food & Nutrition$384kReligion$279kRecreation & Sports$200kHuman Services$200kYouth Development$132kHealth$119kHousing & Shelter$100kOther$0
02FY2022 · 40 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k33 grants · $141k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $112k
$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNION GOSPEL MISSION$24,500
TEEN CHALLENGE$21,000
NEIGHBOR INC FOOD SHELF$20,000
CAMP VICTORY$12,000
CAMP JIM$12,000
Individual grant recipient$12,000
GOOD IN THE HOOD$10,000
ICU MOBILE$8,000
Individual grant recipient$8,000
Individual grant recipient$7,000
Individual grant recipient$7,000
PEOPLE SERVING PEOPLE$6,000
HEALTH EAST (PILLARS)$6,000
DWELLING PLACE$6,000
AVENUES$6,000
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 (FY17–22, $243k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%ICA FOOD SHELF: $10k → 11%ICA FOOD SHELF: $10k → 11%ICA FOOD SHELF: $10k → 11%ICA FOOD SHELF: $10k → 11%ICA FOOD SHELF: $10k → 11%ICA FOOD SHELF: $5k → 11%GOOD IN THE HOOD: $10k → 11%GOOD IN THE HOOD: $10k → 11%GOOD IN THE HOOD: $10k → 11%GOOD IN THE HOOD: $10k → 11%GOOD IN THE HOOD: $8k → 11%GOOD IN THE HOOD: $6k → 11%DWELLING PLACE: $6k → 14%DWELLING PLACE: $6k → 14%DWELLING PLACE: $6k → 14%DWELLING PLACE: $6k → 14%DWELLING PLACE: $6k → 14%DWELLING PLACE: $5k → 14%PRISM: $12k → 11%PRISM: $8k → 11%PRISM: $8k → 11%PRISM: $8k → 11%PRISM: $7k → 11%PRISM: $4k → 11%YOUTH LINK: $10k → 11%YOUTH LINK: $10k → 11%YOUTH LINK: $10k → 11%YOUTH LINK: $10k → 11%YOUTH LINK: $8k → 11%YOUTH LINK: $5k → 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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.0M · 41 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

41 repeat relationships: 39 still active in FY2022, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

41
3

Total granted

$2.0M
$11k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+74%
+173%

Still filing today

37%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
Human ServicesFood & NutritionHousing & ShelterRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • SH
    SECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND
    6× · 2017–2022 · $198k · revenue +96%
  • UG
    UNION GOSPEL MISSION INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $116k · revenue +246%
  • CJ
    CAMP JIM INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $73k · revenue +19%

Funded once

  • M
    MATTERgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $6k · revenue +173%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
  • AW
    ALPHA WOMENS CENTER
    one grant, 2017 · $2k
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
St John the Evangelist Homeless Shelter Inc

To honor the dignity, restore hope and create lasting change for homeless and those at risk in the green bay area.

Housing & Shelter
2
Mercy House Minneapolis
Human Services
3
Good Samaritan Mission Inc

To care for the needy, share the good news of jesus christ and change lives by providing counseling, life skill training, dignity gained through work and christ-centered discipleship.

—
4
The Family Place

Assisting families in shelters to gain more confidence in building future goals that will lead to success of the entire family.

—
5
Agate Housing & Services Inc

To end homelessness and relieve hunger through action and advocacy.

Religion
6
Shepherd's House Ministries

To grow disciples of jesus christ by ministering to and serving those in need while sharing god's hope, faith, and love, bringing them to a place of restoration and empowering them to become productive members of our society.

Housing & Shelter
7
Shelter House Community Shelter and Transition Services

Through shelter and housing, advocacy and supportive services, our mission is to prevent and end homelessness in our community.

—
8
Hope Ministries

Hope ministries is one of the largest private providers of free meals, safe shelter, and comprehensive life-recovery support for homeless, near-homeless, and hungry men, women, and children in iowa. the mission of hope ministries is to…

Human Services
9
Partners for Affordable Housing

Partners for Affordable Housing is missioned to provide shelter for homeless families and individuals and help them secure economically viable long term housing. The Organization owns and operates a number of scattered site housing…

—
10
Anna Marie's Alliance

Provide education, intervention and advocacy to those affected by relationship abuse with a holistic approach and anti-oppression focus.

Human Services
11
Hope Gospel Mission Inc

Hope gospel mission exists to offer christ-centered, life changing help to the homeless and needy in western wisconsin.

Philanthropy
12
Missions Inc Programs

See Schedule O.Established in 1895, Missions Inc. Programs is a multi-service non-profit organization with a long history of providing services to those who are most in need, each year offering thousands of people, whose lives have been…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is People Serving People Inc; the most unlike its peers is Chanarambie Christian Camps. 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

17 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. 17 of the 45 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
14/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNION GOSPEL MISSION INC: $116,000 · OtherUNION GOSPEL MISSION INCIndividual grant recipient: $79,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTEEN CHALLENGE: $79,000 · OtherTEEN CHALLENGENEIGHBOR INC FOOD SHELF: $78,859 · OtherNEIGHBOR INC FOOD SHELFCAMP JIM INC: $72,500 · OtherCAMP VICTORY: $72,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $67,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $59,500 · OtherHEALTH EAST (PILLARS): $53,000 · OtherMETRO HOPE MINISTRIES INC: $50,000 · Other+25 more: $722,500 · Other+25 moreINTERCONGREGATION COMMUNITIES ASSOCIATION INC: $54,500 · Human ServicesINTERCONGREGA…GOOD IN THE 'HOOD: $53,500 · Human ServicesGOOD IN THE '…YOUTHLINK: $53,000 · Human ServicesYOUTHLINKPEOPLE RESPONDING IN SOCIAL MINISTRY: $47,000 · Human ServicesPEOPLE RESPON…The Dwelling Place: $34,500 · Human ServicesThe Dwelling …SECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND: $197,550 · Food & NutritionSECOND HARVE…PEOPLE REACHING OUT TO OTHER PEOPLE INC: $15,000 · Food & NutritionPEOPLE REACH…+1 more: $6,000 · Food & NutritionPEOPLE SERVING PEOPLE INC: $63,000 · Housing & ShelterGRINDSTONE LAKE BIBLE CAMP: $31,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$1,450,859Human Services$242,500Food & Nutrition$218,550Housing & Shelter$63,000Recreation & Sports$31,000

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 budgetSECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND: $197,550 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetUNION GOSPEL MISSION INC: $116,000 over 6y, 4.7% of budgetCAMP JIM INC: $72,500 over 6y, 2.9% of budgetPEOPLE SERVING PEOPLE INC: $63,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetINTERCONGREGATION COMMUNITIES ASSOCIATION INC: $54,500 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetGOOD IN THE 'HOOD: $53,500 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetYOUTHLINK: $53,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetMETRO HOPE MINISTRIES INC: $50,000 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetPEOPLE RESPONDING IN SOCIAL MINISTRY: $47,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetThe Dwelling Place: $34,500 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetCHANARAMBIE CHRISTIAN CAMPS: $34,000 over 6y, 3.3% of budgetFOREST SPRINGS CAMP AND CONFERENCE CENTER INC: $31,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetGRINDSTONE LAKE BIBLE CAMP: $31,000 over 6y, 2.7% of budgetIMAGE CLEAR ULTRASOUND INC: $30,500 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetHAVEN HOUSING: $26,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetPEOPLE REACHING OUT TO OTHER PEOPLE INC: $15,000 over 4y, 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.

  • Who funds SECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND ↗
  • Who funds UNION GOSPEL MISSION INC ↗
  • Who funds CAMP JIM INC ↗
  • Who funds PEOPLE SERVING PEOPLE INC ↗
  • Who funds INTERCONGREGATION COMMUNITIES ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds GOOD IN THE 'HOOD ↗
  • Who funds YOUTHLINK ↗
  • Who funds METRO HOPE MINISTRIES INC ↗
  • Who funds PEOPLE RESPONDING IN SOCIAL MINISTRY ↗
  • Who funds The Dwelling Place ↗
  • Who funds CHANARAMBIE CHRISTIAN CAMPS ↗
  • Who funds FOREST SPRINGS CAMP AND CONFERENCE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds GRINDSTONE LAKE BIBLE CAMP ↗
  • Who funds IMAGE CLEAR ULTRASOUND INC ↗
  • Who funds HAVEN HOUSING ↗

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 Minneapolis Found…The Richard M Schulze…Xcel Energy FoundationOtto Bremer TrustLand O'Lakes Foundati…Thrivent Financial fo…Pohlad Family Foundat…Ch Robinson Worldwide…Saint Paul & Minnesot…Mightycause Charitabl…Thrivent Charitable I…Food Group Minnesota …
The Minneapolis FoundationMN22.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Minneapolis Foundation · The Richard M Schulze Family Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · Land O'Lakes Foundation · Thrivent Financial for Lutherans · Pohlad Family Foundation · Ch Robinson Worldwide Foundation · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Thrivent Charitable Impact & Investing · Food Group Minnesota Inc The

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 Peace Shalom Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Peace Shalom 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report 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.

    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 45 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Peace Shalom’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