Skip to content
Pritchett Foundation Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Pritchett 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.

$100k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$90k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0181% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$322kInternational$92kHousing & Shelter$85kHuman Services$50kRecreation & Sports$30kEducation$25kHealth$10kPublic Benefit$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $90k
$90,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$3.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BY GRACE TRUST$90,000
IMPACT CITY FC$10,000
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 (FY17–17, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CHILDREN OF THE NATIONS: $2k → 10%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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$578k · 10 repeat orgs$246k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
8

Total granted

$578k
$156k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+71%
+87%

Still filing today

60%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 10% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $90k 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
Human ServicesEducationYouth DevelopmentReligionArts & CultureHealthOther
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

  • PH
    Project Hope Alliance
    2× · 2021–2023 · $85k · revenue +91%
  • OC
    OLIVE CREST
    2× · 2019–2021 · $20k · revenue +71%
  • HN
    HENRI NOUWEN SOCIETY
    2× · 2018–2020 · $20k · revenue +173%

Funded once

  • PD
    PRO DEO FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $100k · revenue -1% · 43% of their budget
  • MO
    MT OLYMPUS PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
    one grant, 2023 · $13k
  • FO
    FELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ATHLETESgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +87%
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
House of Refuge Faith Based
Human Services
2
Be Hope International
Religion
3
Sole Ministries

None

Religion
4
Source of Hope Ministries
Religion
5
Samaritan's Purse

Samaritan's purse is a nondenominational evangelical christian organization providing spiritual and physical aid to hurting people around the world. since 1970, samaritan's purse has helped meet the needs of people who are victims of war,…

Religion
6
Purehope Coalition

Our mission is to shape a world free of sexual exploitation and brokenness by providing christian solutions in a sexualized culture.continued on schedule owe equip parents and college students to lead a lifestyle of prayer, understanding,…

Civil Rights
7
Connect the World

The purpose of the organization is to share the passionate love of god the father throughout the world, his salvation through his son, the lord jesus christ, and to lead people to an experience with the holy spirit and his power. our…

Religion
8
Tri-State Christian Academy Inc

Our desire is to provide balanced, biblical direction to the child as a support to the home and to train each student to be self-disciplined and biblically directed in their walk with god and their fellow man. it is also our desire to meet…

Education
9
Hilo Ministries Inc

To be an organization where people are excited to assist in the love and care of the orphan and those in foster care, as well as providing temporary housing and training for those in the worldwide missionary field.

Human Services
10
Project New Hope International

Publicly supported evangelical organization focused on community transformation and empowerment of impoverished neighborhoods in South America and around the world. Missionaries work with community leaders assisting them in various mission…

—
11
International Needs

International needs has the vision to transform lives and change communities by helping christian nationals serve both god and neighbor within their own countries.

—
12
Christ the Divine Teacher Trust
Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Olive Crest; the most unlike its peers is Pro Deo Foundation. 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

12 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. 12 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $200,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST INC: $109,400 · OtherCAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST INCCAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST INTL: $49,800 · OtherCAMPUS CRUSADE FOR CHRIST INTLIMPACT CITY FC: $20,000 · Other+3 more: $33,000 · Other+3 moreBY GRACE TRUST: $90,000 · Human ServicesBY GRACE TRUSTHOPE REFUGE INC: $30,000 · Human ServicesHOPE REFUGE INC+1 more: $2,000 · Human ServicesProject Hope Alliance: $85,000 · EducationProject Hope Al…BIOLA UNIVERSITY INC: $15,200 · EducationBIOLA UNIVERSIT…LINCOLN CLUB INSTITUTE: $10,000 · EducationLINCOLN CLUB IN…PRO DEO FOUNDATION: $100,000 · Youth DevelopmentPRO DEO FOUNDAT…FELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ATHLETES: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentFELLOWSHIP OF C…BETTER TOGETHER MINISTRIES INC: $29,000 · ReligionWILD HOPE INTERNATIONAL: $1,000 · ReligionOLIVE CREST: $20,000 · HealthHENRI NOUWEN SOCIETY: $20,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$412,200Human Services$122,000Education$110,200Youth Development$110,000Religion$30,000Health$20,000Arts & Culture$20,000

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 budgetPRO DEO FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 43% of budgetProject Hope Alliance: $85,000 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetHOPE REFUGE INC: $30,000 over 2y, 4.7% of budgetBETTER TOGETHER MINISTRIES INC: $29,000 over 3y, 6.5% of budgetOLIVE CREST: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHENRI NOUWEN SOCIETY: $20,000 over 2y, 7.5% of budgetBIOLA UNIVERSITY INC: $15,200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ATHLETES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLINCOLN CLUB INSTITUTE: $10,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetCHILDREN OF THE NATIONS: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWILD HOPE INTERNATIONAL: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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 PRO DEO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BY GRACE TRUST ↗
  • Who funds Project Hope Alliance ↗
  • Who funds HOPE REFUGE INC ↗
  • Who funds BETTER TOGETHER MINISTRIES INC ↗
  • Who funds OLIVE CREST ↗
  • Who funds HENRI NOUWEN SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds BIOLA UNIVERSITY INC ↗
  • Who funds FELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ATHLETES ↗
  • Who funds LINCOLN CLUB INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN OF THE NATIONS ↗
  • Who funds WILD HOPE INTERNATIONAL ↗

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.

Natl Christian Charit…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA9.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · 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 Pritchett Foundation Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Pritchett Foundation Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 Pritchett Foundation Trust?

    Find your warmest path to Pritchett Foundation Trust 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-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 Pritchett’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