Skip to content

· Private foundation

Smith County State Bank & Trust Co Charitable 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.

$15k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Philanthropy$49kPublic Benefit$29kEducation$16kCommunity Improvement$8kRecreation & Sports$7kArts & Culture$7kHuman Services$5kReligion$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,668
Median grant
1
States reached
$196k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SMITH COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$5,000
UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 237$4,700
CITY OF LEBANON$2,668
CENTER THEATER INC$1,108
SMITH CENTER PUBLIC LIBRARY$1,108
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 (FY19–19, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%SUNPORCH OF SMITH COUNTY: $2k → 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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$101k · 8 repeat orgs$26k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
11

Total granted

$101k
$25k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-34%
+111%

Still filing today

25%
9%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
Arts & CultureCommunity ImprovementHuman 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

  • SC
    SMITH COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
    8× · 2018–2025 · $49k
  • CO
    CITY OF LEBANON
    7× · 2017–2025 · $16k
  • CO
    CITY OF SMITH CENTER
    3× · 2017–2020 · $13k

Funded once

  • SC
    SMITH CENTER MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • SC
    SMITH COUNTY CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENT
    one grant, 2018 · $3k
  • SC
    SMITH COUNTY MEMORIAL HOS
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
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

3 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. 3 of the 20 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)
3/3
Grantees still filing
1/3
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SMITH COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $48,641 · OtherSMITH COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONCITY OF LEBANON: $16,475 · OtherCITY OF LEBANONCITY OF SMITH CENTER: $12,566 · OtherCITY OF SMITH CENTERUNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 237: $7,383 · OtherUNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 237SMITH CENTER MUNICIPAL GOLF COURSE: $4,763 · Other+12 more: $23,122 · Other+12 moreCENTER THEATRE INC: $6,708 · Arts & CultureU S CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $5,790 · Community ImprovementSUNPORCH OF SMITH CENTER INC: $1,992 · Human Services
Other$112,950Arts & Culture$6,708Community Improvement$5,790Human Services$1,992

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCENTER THEATRE INC: $6,708 over 3y, 4.7% of budgetU S CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $5,790 over 3y, 6.0% of budgetSUNPORCH OF SMITH CENTER INC: $1,992 over 1y, 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 CENTER THEATRE INC ↗
  • Who funds U S CENTER FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds SUNPORCH OF SMITH CENTER 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.

Rathert Foundation % the Peoples BankKS15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Rathert Foundation % the Peoples Bank · Greater Salina Community Foundation · Bill & Julia Thomas Charitable Trust

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 Smith County State Bank & Trust Co Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Smith County State Bank & Trust Co Charitable Trust. 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report 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 20 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 Smith County State Bank &’s filings →

    More from the funding graph