Skip to content

· Private foundation

Silas & Ruth Claypool Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$30k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$10k
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 2025.

Recreation & Sports$95kEducation$52kFood & Nutrition$34kPublic Safety & Disaster$25kCrime & Legal$24kHuman Services$23kArts & Culture$19kHealth$15kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
$2,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$402k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$10,000
PALESTINE CUSD 3$10,000
OBLONG CHILDREN'S CHRISTIAN HOME$2,500
PALESTINE PRESERVATION PROJECT SOCI$2,500
CRAWFORD COUNTY SADDLE CLUB$2,500
PALESTINE DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION$2,500
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 (FY25–25, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%OBLONG CHILDREN'S CHRISTIAN HOME: $3k → 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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

45%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$141k · 7 repeat orgs$169k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +76% since the first grant, against +22% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
24

Total granted

$141k
$159k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+76%
+22%

Still filing today

14%
21%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
Food & NutritionCommunity ImprovementEmploymentEducationArts & CultureHuman ServicesOther
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    4× · 2019–2025 · $33k
  • PC
    Palestine CUSD#3
    3× · 2021–2025 · $30k
  • CC
    Crawford County Fair Association
    5× · 2019–2023 · $28k

Funded once

  • CC
    Crawford County Sheriff Department
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • CO
    City of Robinson Parks Department
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
  • CC
    CRAWFORD COUNTY KIDS ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -59%
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
Crawford County Farm Bureau

The mission of the Crawford County Farm Bureau is to provide social, educational and promotional activities, programs and services for its membership, that will further the local agricultural industry.

—
2
Community Food Pantry

Local Community Food Pantry

Food & Nutrition
3
Pratt County Foodbank Inc

County food bank to assist with food needs of limited income families

Food & Nutrition
4
Crawford County United Ministries Inc

To serve poor and needy individuals and families in Crawford County; to foster c cooperation and coordination among churches and religious organizations serving

Human Services
5
Crawford County Fair Assc

The Crawford County Fair Association intends to create a safe modern, convenient meeting place for all Crawford County citizens and visitor to the area. Our purpose is to provide building, shelters, seating, and open areas for recreational…

Arts & Culture
6
The Crawford County Fair Association Incorporated

The organization is ran and managed by a group of volunteers and is mandated to manage the county fairgrounds year-round as well as organize fund and implement the annual county fair in Crawford County KS. It is funded from local…

Recreation & Sports
7
Coal City Food Pantry

Provide food to people in need within the Coal City School District.

Food & Nutrition
8
New Vision Community Services

Food Pantry

Food & Nutrition
9
Crawford County Humane Society

Humane care and treatment of animals

Animals
10
Crawford County Development Association

To conduct activities toward economic development for all of Crawford County, Illinois.

Community Improvement
11
Community Food Pantry

To provide emergency food for indigent families in the surrounding counties.

Food & Nutrition
12
Clifton Community Food Pantry

To supply food to low income families

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Crawford County Kids Association; the most unlike its peers is Palestine Community Food Bank. 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

9 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. 9 of the 35 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $33,136 · OtherIndividual grant recipientPalestine CUSD#3: $30,000 · OtherPalestine CUSD#3Crawford County Fair Association: $27,625 · OtherCrawford County Fair AssociationCrawford County Sheriff's Office: $20,000 · OtherCrawford County Sheriff's OfficeCrawford County Sheriff Department: $10,000 · OtherCity of Robinson Parks Department: $10,000 · OtherCrawford County VFW Post 4549: $10,000 · OtherRobinson CUSD #2: $10,000 · OtherRobinson Soccer Club: $10,000 · OtherPalestine Public Library District: $9,225 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $8,955 · Other+15 more: $80,714 · Other+15 moreLawrence Crawford Association for Exceptional Citizens: $15,495 · EmploymentPALESTINE COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $10,000 · Food & NutritionTHE ROBINSON AREA FOOD PANTRY: $3,225 · Food & NutritionCRAWFORD COUNTY KIDS ASSOCIATION: $10,000 · EducationCrawford County Heritage Foundation: $3,500 · Arts & CulturePalestine Development Association: $2,500 · Community ImprovementEMBARRAS RIVER BASIN AGENCY INC: $831 · Community ImprovementOBLONG CHILDREN'S CHRISTIAN HOME: $2,500 · Human ServicesCRAWFORD COUNTY SADDLE CLUB NFP: $2,500 · Recreation & Sports
Other$259,655Employment$15,495Food & Nutrition$13,225Education$10,000Arts & Culture$3,500Community Improvement$3,331Human Services$2,500Recreation & Sports$2,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLawrence Crawford Association for Exceptional Citizens: $15,495 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetCRAWFORD COUNTY KIDS ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetCrawford County Heritage Foundation: $3,500 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetTHE ROBINSON AREA FOOD PANTRY: $3,225 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetOBLONG CHILDREN'S CHRISTIAN HOME: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPalestine Development Association: $2,500 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetEMBARRAS RIVER BASIN AGENCY INC: $831 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Lawrence Crawford Association for Exceptional Citizens ↗
  • Who funds CRAWFORD COUNTY KIDS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds PALESTINE COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds Crawford County Heritage Foundation ↗
  • Who funds THE ROBINSON AREA FOOD PANTRY ↗
  • Who funds OBLONG CHILDREN'S CHRISTIAN HOME ↗
  • Who funds Palestine Development Association ↗
  • Who funds CRAWFORD COUNTY SADDLE CLUB NFP ↗
  • Who funds EMBARRAS RIVER BASIN AGENCY INC ↗

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.

Mary Heath FoundationIL24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Mary Heath Foundation · Southeastern Illinois Community Foundation · Eastern Illinois Foodbank · 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 Silas & Ruth Claypool Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Silas & Ruth Claypool Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 Silas & Ruth Claypool Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Silas & Ruth Claypool 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.

    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 35 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 Silas & Ruth Claypool’s filings →

    More from the funding graph