Skip to content

· Private foundation

Sc Christine B Stevenson Charitable

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$5k
Granted FY2026still arriving
3
Grants FY2026still arriving
1
States reached
$3k
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, FY2019 to 2026.

Health$25kArts & Culture$12kReligion$6kHuman Services$6kEducation$4k
02FY2026 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,958
Median grant
1
States reached
$126k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SOUTH MAIN CHAPEL AND MERCY CENTER$2,937
DUE WEST ROBOTICS$1,958
NEW HOPE METHODIST CHURCH$495
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 (FY21–22, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%UPSTATE WARRIOR SOLUTION INC: $2k → 10%UPSTATE WARRIOR SOLUTION INC: $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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$46k · 6 repeat orgs$7k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2026, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
1

Total granted

$46k
$2k

Still filing today

67%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 9% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
HealthArts & CultureHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • AF
    ANDERSON FREE CLINIC
    5× · 2019–2025 · $14k · revenue -38%
  • AC
    ANDERSON COUNTY ARTS COUNCIL
    3× · 2021–2024 · $12k · revenue +7%
  • CA
    CANCER ASSOCIATION OF ANDERSON
    3× · 2019–2022 · $10k · revenue +49%

Funded once

  • FO
    FRIENDS OF THE ABBEVILLE LIBRARIES
    one grant, 2022 · $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
04the grantee network

5 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 5 of the 9 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
5/5
Grantees still filing
3/5
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ANDERSON FREE CLINIC: $14,205 · HealthANDERSON FREE CLINICCANCER ASSOCIATION OF ANDERSON: $10,355 · HealthCANCER ASSOCIATION OF ANDERSONANDERSON COUNTY ARTS COUNCIL: $12,340 · Arts & CultureANDERSON COUNTY ARTS COUNC…NEW HOPE METHODIST CHURCH: $5,809 · OtherNEW HOPE METHODIST CHUR…SOUTH MAIN CHAPEL AND MERCY CENTER: $2,937 · OtherSOUTH MAIN CHAPEL AND M…FRIENDS OF THE ABBEVILLE LIBRARIES: $2,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF THE ABBEVILL…DUE WEST A R P CHURCH: $400 · OtherUPSTATE WARRIOR SOLUTION INC: $3,235 · Human ServicesDUE WEST ROBOTICS: $1,958 · Education
Health$24,560Arts & Culture$12,340Other$11,146Human Services$3,235Education$1,958

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetANDERSON FREE CLINIC: $14,205 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetANDERSON COUNTY ARTS COUNCIL: $12,340 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetCANCER ASSOCIATION OF ANDERSON: $10,355 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetUPSTATE WARRIOR SOLUTION INC: $3,235 over 2y, 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 ANDERSON FREE CLINIC ↗
  • Who funds ANDERSON COUNTY ARTS COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds CANCER ASSOCIATION OF ANDERSON ↗
  • Who funds UPSTATE WARRIOR SOLUTION INC ↗
  • Who funds DUE WEST ROBOTICS ↗

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.

Sc Josephine Stevenson TrustMO17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sc Josephine Stevenson Trust · Duke Energy Foundation · 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 Sc Christine B Stevenson Charitable funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sc Christine B Stevenson 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%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 9 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Sc Christine B Stevenson’s filings →

    More from the funding graph