Skip to content

· Public charity

St Lukes Episcopal Church Fdn

Provide grant funding for missions, charitable outreach ministries, and st luke's episcoplal church programs, buildings and grounds.

$227k
Granted FY2023
9
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$65k
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 2023.

Religion$260kInternational$203kEducation$167kFood & Nutrition$157kHuman Services$145kHousing & Shelter$23kPhilanthropy$20kPublic Safety & Disaster$7k
02FY2023 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $192,700, the rows itemized in this filing. The $226,700 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $34,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $10k–50k7 grants · $75k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $118k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$4.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EPISCOPAL RELIEF & DEVELOPMENT$65,000
ST LUKE'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH$52,700
ROWAN HELPING MINISTRIES$15,000
LOVE MUST ACT$10,000
THE EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF NC$10,000
THE EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF NC$10,000
WE ARE GRACES$10,000
MEAL ON WHEELS$10,000
ST LUKE'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH$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 (FY20–23, $58k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 57% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%TWO MULES FOR HAITI: $13k → 9%TWO MULES FOR HAITI: $13k → 9%ROWAN HELPING MINISTRIES: $15k → 15%ROWAN HELPING MINISTRIES: $10k → 15%ROWAN HELPING MINISTRIES: $8k → 15%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 21% of St Lukes Episcopal Church Fdn’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 68% of the giving stays in NC; by stated purpose, 57%.

St Lukes Episcopal Church Fdnlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 20% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$866k · 14 repeat orgs$116k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2023, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
6

Total granted

$866k
$116k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+54%
+269%

Still filing today

50%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23
InternationalHuman ServicesFood & NutritionPhilanthropyOther
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

  • ER
    EPISCOPAL RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT
    4× · 2020–2023 · $126k · revenue +54%
  • LM
    LOVE MUST ACT INC
    3× · 2020–2023 · $60k · revenue +38%
  • GR
    GUATEMALAN RELIEF ASSISTANCE FOR CHILDRENS EDUCATIONAL SERVICES
    4× · 2017–2021 · $40k · revenue +49%

Funded once

  • EG
    EVEN GROUND
    one grant, 2018 · $30k
  • HF
    HOPE FOR KAJIADO CORPgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +269%
  • HF
    HOLY FAMILY EPISCOPAL CHURCH
    one grant, 2017 · $23k
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
Building Schools in Africa
Education
2
Global Nutritional Meals

Providing food and building sustainable communities.

—
3
Reaching Out to the Nations Inc

Reaching Out To The Nations' mission is to both preach and demonstrate the love of Go through its projects and programs which include preaching, food distribution, widow and orphan assistance and leadership training.

Religion
4
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.

—
5
Seeds of Change Foundation
Philanthropy
6
Emmanne Ministries

We point people to jesus through loving action and the life-giving word.

International
7
Nourishing the Nations

Nourishing the Nations exists to provide nourishing meals to the children of Kisumu County in western Kenya. These meals are provided through partherships with local Kenyan pastors.

Food & Nutrition
8
Mary's Meals Usa Inc

To raise donations to (i) provide a daily meal in a place of education for children in the world's poorest communities; (ii) occasionally provide relief for those suffering, in any part of the world, as a result of humanitarian crises…

International
9
The Joseph Assignment Global Initiative

Our mission is to impact the lives of the world s poorest children and their families by addressing their educational, economic, and physical needs through collaborative initiatives that leverage resources necessary to stimulate systemic…

International
10
A Is for Africa Ltd

A is for Africa is an educational foundation focusing education and health among the Maasai people of Tanzania East Africa. Our primary work involves providing educational support to the local government schools in the way of a school…

International
11
Womens Global Health Network Inc

To promote health and education for women and children in the most underserved and difficult to reach places in the world.

Education
12
Rise International

RISE builds primary schools in rural Angola to educate children, empower communities and contribute to the rebuilding of the country.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Guatemalan Relief Assistance for Childrens Educational Services; the most unlike its peers is Meals On Wheels of Rowan. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

10 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. 10 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
9/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ST LUKE EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $223,973 · OtherST LUKE EPISCOPAL CHURCHWE ARE GRACES: $79,000 · OtherWE ARE GRACESTHE LUNCH PROJECT: $58,500 · OtherTHE LUNCH PROJECTSUDAN ROWAN INC: $51,400 · OtherSUDAN ROWAN INCLOVE MUST ACT INC: $50,000 · OtherLOVE MUST ACT INCEPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF NORTH CAROLINA: $38,000 · OtherEPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF NORTH CAROLINAKARIMU: $31,020 · OtherEVEN GROUND: $30,000 · OtherHOLY FAMILY EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $22,500 · Other+2 more: $18,000 · OtherEPISCOPAL RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT: $126,000 · Human ServicesEPISCOPAL RELIEF AND …ROWAN HELPING MINISTRIES: $33,000 · Human ServicesROWAN HELPING MINISTR…TWO MULES FOR HAITI: $25,000 · Human ServicesTWO MULES FOR HAITILOVE MUST ACT INC: $60,000 · InternationalLOVE MUST ACT INCGUATEMALAN RELIEF ASSISTANCE FOR CHILDRENS EDUCATIONAL SERVICES: $40,388 · InternationalGUATEMALAN RELIEF…INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN CENTERS FOR THE DEAF INC: $26,000 · InternationalINTERNATIONAL CHR…HOPE FOR KAJIADO CORP: $25,000 · InternationalHOPE FOR KAJIADO …MEALS ON WHEELS OF ROWAN: $23,645 · Food & NutritionTHRIVE GLOBAL PROJECT INC: $20,084 · Philanthropy
Other$602,393Human Services$184,000International$151,388Food & Nutrition$23,645Philanthropy$20,084

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 budgetEPISCOPAL RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT: $126,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetLOVE MUST ACT INC: $60,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetTHE LUNCH PROJECT: $58,500 over 4y, 22% of budgetGUATEMALAN RELIEF ASSISTANCE FOR CHILDRENS EDUCATIONAL SERVICES: $40,388 over 4y, 2.3% of budgetROWAN HELPING MINISTRIES: $33,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetINTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN CENTERS FOR THE DEAF INC: $26,000 over 2y, 4.9% of budgetHOPE FOR KAJIADO CORP: $25,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetTWO MULES FOR HAITI: $25,000 over 2y, 61% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS OF ROWAN: $23,645 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetTHRIVE GLOBAL PROJECT INC: $20,084 over 1y, 2.6% 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 EPISCOPAL RELIEF AND DEVELOPMENT ↗
  • Who funds LOVE MUST ACT INC ↗
  • Who funds THE LUNCH PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds GUATEMALAN RELIEF ASSISTANCE FOR CHILDRENS EDUCATIONAL SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds ROWAN HELPING MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds INTERNATIONAL CHRISTIAN CENTERS FOR THE DEAF INC ↗
  • Who funds HOPE FOR KAJIADO CORP ↗
  • Who funds TWO MULES FOR HAITI ↗
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS OF ROWAN ↗
  • Who funds THRIVE GLOBAL PROJECT 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.

Foundation for the CarolinasNC14.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Foundation for the Carolinas · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 St Lukes Episcopal Church Fdn funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from St Lukes Episcopal Church Fdn. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%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 · 0–20%
    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 St Lukes Episcopal Church Fdn?

    Find your warmest path to St Lukes Episcopal Church Fdn 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 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on St Lukes Episcopal Church Fdn’s filings →

    More from the funding graph