Skip to content
The Cole Foundation Trust #1255001231 at a glance

· Private foundation

The Cole Foundation Trust #1255001231

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$48k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$13k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Environment$110kReligion$84kHuman Services$45kCrime & Legal$28kHealth$22kArts & Culture$4kEducation$4kAnimals$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $25k
$2,500
Median grant
4
States reached
$818k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JUNIOR AUXILIARY OF RANKIN COUNTY$13,000
NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA$12,000
ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH$9,000
CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER$4,000
LIGHT OF THE VILLAGE$2,500
MAKE-A-WISH ALABAMA$2,500
ST BENEDICT'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH$2,000
MEMORIAL TRUST OF THE NSCDA IN ALABAMA$1,000
WAVE OF HEARTS$1,000
UMS-WRIGHT PREPATORY SCHOOL$1,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%MEMORIAL TRUST OF THE NSCDA IN ALABAMA: $1k → 14%WAVE OF HEARTS: $1k → 13%COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NW FLORIDA: $1k → 16%MAKE-A-WISH ALABAMA: $3k → 16%NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA: $16k → 19%THE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $1k → 9%MEMORIAL TRUST OF THE NSCDA IN ALABAMA: $1k → 14%ST BENEDICTS'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $9k → 13%NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA: $16k → 19%MEMORIAL TRUST OF THE NSCDA IN ALABAMA: $1k → 14%ST BENEDICTS'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $8k → 13%NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA: $14k → 19%MEMORIAL TRUST OF THE NSCDA IN ALABAMA: $1k → 14%ST BENEDICT'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $2k → 13%NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA: $12k → 19%ST BENEDICT'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $2k → 13%NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA: $12k → 19%NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA: $11k → 19%NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA: $10k → 19%NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA: $10k → 19%NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA: $9k → 19%THE MOORER YMCA: $1k → 19%LIGHT OF THE VILLAGE: $3k → 19%ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $11k → 19%ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $10k → 19%ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $10k → 19%ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $9k → 19%ST JOHN'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $8k → 19%CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $4k → 19%CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $3k → 19%CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $3k → 19%CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $3k → 19%CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $3k → 19%CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $3k → 19%CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $3k → 19%CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $3k → 19%CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $3k → 19%WILMER HALL: $16k → 19%WILMER HALL: $16k → 19%WILMER HALL: $10k → 19%WILMER HALL: $8k → 19%WILMER HALL: $6k → 19%WILMER HALL: $6k → 19%WILMER HALL: $5k → 19%ST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $3k → 19%WILMER HALL: $3k → 19%ST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $3k → 19%ST PAUL'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $2k → 19%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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$343k · 12 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +57% since the first grant, against +34% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
7

Total granted

$343k
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+57%
+34%

Still filing today

25%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
AnimalsEducationReligionHealthOther
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

  • NC
    NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA
    9× · 2017–2025 · $110k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    8× · 2017–2024 · $70k
  • SJ
    ST JOHNS EPISCOPAL CHURCH
    5× · 2017–2025 · $48k

Funded once

  • GS
    GOVERNMENT STREET PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
    one grant, 2023 · $1k
  • UC
    UMS-WRIGHT CORPORATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $1k · revenue +34%
  • TW
    THE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +124%
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
The School of Montessori Inc

Christian pre-school

—
2
Purrfect Pets Inc

Animal rescue shelter

Animals
3
Paws Animal Welfare Society Inc

Cat rescue operation

Animals
4
Promoting Animal Welfare Society Inc

Prevention of cruelty to animals

Animals
5
Precious Paws Rescue Inc

Animal rescue

Animals
6
Paws & Claws Humane Society

Animal shelter and humane society.

Animals
7
Milbank Animal Rescue Services

Animal Rescue

Animals
8
Circle P Sanctuary Inc

Animal shelter & education awareness

Animals
9
Association for Animal Rights Inc

To care for homeless animals (providing food, shelter and medical care) and find them a suitable home.

—
10
Wild Oak Academy Inc

Educational Services

Education
11
Coastal Animal Rescue & Educational

Sanctuary for abused animals

—
12
Wizard of Paws Wildlife Education Inc

Non profit wildlife sanctuary

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Prichard Preparatory School Inc; the most unlike its peers is Wave of Hearts Inc. 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, 2017–2026.

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. 9 of the 22 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMA: $110,000 · OtherNATURE CONSERVANCY IN ALABAMAIndividual grant recipient: $70,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientST JOHNS EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $47,500 · OtherST JOHNS EPISCOPAL CHURCHJUNIOR AUXILIARY OF RANKIN COUNTY MISSISSIPPI INC: $44,500 · OtherJUNIOR AUXILIARY OF RANKIN COUNTY MISSISSIPPI INCTHE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $28,000 · OtherTHE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INCST BENEDICTS'S EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $17,000 · Other+10 more: $25,500 · Other+10 moreTHE LIGHT OF THE VILLAGE A NONPROF CORPORATION: $5,500 · ReligionMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF ALABAMA: $2,500 · HealthTHE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $1,000 · AnimalsMOBILE SOCIETY FOR PREVENTION OF CR: $1,000 · AnimalsWave of Hearts Inc: $1,000 · EducationPRICHARD PREPARATORY SCHOOL INC: $500 · Education
Other$342,500Religion$5,500Health$2,500Animals$2,000Education$1,500

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 budgetJUNIOR AUXILIARY OF RANKIN COUNTY MISSISSIPPI INC: $44,500 over 4y, 22% of budgetTHE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $28,000 over 9y, 1.6% of budgetTHE LIGHT OF THE VILLAGE A NONPROF CORPORATION: $5,500 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetUMS-WRIGHT CORPORATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMOBILE SOCIETY FOR PREVENTION OF CR: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPRICHARD PREPARATORY SCHOOL INC: $500 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 JUNIOR AUXILIARY OF RANKIN COUNTY MISSISSIPPI INC ↗
  • Who funds THE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds THE LIGHT OF THE VILLAGE A NONPROF CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF ALABAMA ↗
  • Who funds Wave of Hearts Inc ↗
  • Who funds UMS-WRIGHT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds THE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY ↗
  • Who funds MOBILE SOCIETY FOR PREVENTION OF CR ↗
  • Who funds PRICHARD PREPARATORY SCHOOL 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.

Cd Helen and Jeff Gla…Crampton Trust #12550…The Bank of America C…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Cd Helen and Jeff Glaze FoundationAL13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Cd Helen and Jeff Glaze Foundation · Crampton Trust #1255000731 Regions Bank Trustee · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation 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 The Cole Foundation Trust #1255001231 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Cole Foundation Trust #1255001231. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%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
    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 · 0–5%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Cole Foundation Trust #1255001231?

    Find your warmest path to The Cole Foundation Trust #1255001231 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 22 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 Cole Foundation Trust #1255001231’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