· Public charity
PEO Foundation
To support the educational and charitable funds of the P.E.O.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 13 grants below total $4,626,127 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $8,270,311 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $3,644,184 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $6k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $75k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $341k
- $250k+6 grants · $4.2M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PEO Prog for Continuing Ed | $1,101,768 |
| PEO STAR Scholarship | $843,759 |
| Cottey College | $748,076 |
| PEO Scholar Awards | $672,051 |
| PEO Intl Peace Scholarship | $500,288 |
| PEO Educational Loan Fund | $337,949 |
| Lulu Corkhill Williams Fund | $140,000 |
| Oregon State Chapter Charit Trust | $136,448 |
| Texas Star Oaks Fund | $64,824 |
| Arizona PEO Projects Fund Assoc | $46,318 |
| Iowa PEO Projects Fund Inc | $16,826 |
| Mt Pleasant Community School Founda | $12,000 |
| Illinois PEO Home Fund | $5,820 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY22–22, $31k) land where the poverty rate runs at 5%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +23% since the first grant, against -14% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- PPPEO Program for Continuing Education5× · 2021–2025 · $5.6M · revenue +24% · 34% of their budget
- PSPEO STAR Scholarship5× · 2021–2025 · $3.5M · revenue +44% · 28% of their budget
- PSPEO Scholar Awards5× · 2021–2025 · $3.3M · revenue +27% · 30% of their budget
Funded once
- WPWISCONSIN PEO SISTERHOOD HELP FUND INCone grant, 2022 · $31k · revenue -14% · 33% of their budget
- ASADAMS STATE UNIVERSITYone grant, 2021 · $12k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
P.E.O. is a philanthropic organization where women celebrate the advancement of women; educate women through scholarships, grants, awards, loans and stewardship of Cottey College; and motivate each other to achieve their highest…
P.E.O. is a philanthropic organization where women celebrate the advancement of women, educate women through scholarships, grants, awards, loans and stewardship of Cottey College; and motivate each other to achieve their highest…
P.E.O. is a philanthropic organization where women celebrate the advancement of women; educate women through scholarships, grants, awards, loans and stewardship of Cottey College; and motivate each other to achieve their highest…
P.E.O. is a philanthropic organization where women celebrate the advancement of women; educate women through scholarships, grants, awards, loans and stewardship of Cottey College; and motivate each other to achieve their highest…
To support the educational and charitable funds of the P.E.O. Sisterhood through contributions and provide scholarships for qualified women seeking to further their education.
To support the educational activities of Cottey College, a liberal arts and sciences college located in Nevada, Missouri, primarily by granting to the college the income earned in the fund.
Educational and Charitable
The building fund is used exclusively for purposes of construction, repairs and maintenance of Cottey College, Nevada, Missouri, 64772, a qualified charity.
To provide educational grants and scholarships.
To provide scholarship funds to women involved/affiliated with Greek organizations to aid in continuing and furthering education.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Peo Educational Loan Fund and the most unlike its peers is Texas Star Oaks Fund Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 16 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds PEO Program for Continuing Education ↗
- Who funds COTTEY COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds PEO STAR Scholarship ↗
- Who funds PEO Scholar Awards ↗
- Who funds PEO International Peace Scholarship ↗
- Who funds PEO Educational Loan Fund ↗
- Who funds PEO Sisterhood IL State Chapter ↗
- Who funds OREGON STATE CHAPTER ↗
- Who funds TEXAS STAR OAKS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds ARIZONA PEO PROJECT FUND ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds IOWA PEO PROJECT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Iowa Wesleyan University ↗
- Who funds WISCONSIN PEO SISTERHOOD HELP FUND INC ↗
- Who funds ILLINOIS PEO HOME FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Mt Pleasant Community School Foundation ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: PEO Sisterhood TX State Chapter · PEO Sisterhood IA State Chapter · PEO Sisterhood CA State Chapter · PEO Sisterhood FL State Chapter · PEO Sisterhood AR State Chapter · PEO Sisterhood VA State Chapter · PEO Sisterhood CO State Chapter · PEO Sisterhood MT State Chapter · PEO Sisterhood NV State Chapter · PEO Sisterhood SD State Chapter · PEO Sisterhood TN State Chapter · PEO Sisterhood KY State Chapter
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization PEO Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to PEO Foundation?
Find your warmest path to PEO Foundation 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.