· Private foundation
The Lloyd R Wallace Charitable Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k18 grants · $108k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $95k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $61k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SHOAL CREEK VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT | $60,500 |
| VALLEY CHURCH | $25,000 |
| HAMILTON METHODIST CHURCH | $15,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI | $12,500 |
| NORTH CENTRAL MISSOURI COLLEGE | $12,000 |
| CAMERON REGIONAL MED CTR FOUNDATION | $10,200 |
| CITY OF HAMILTON - PARKS BOARD | $10,200 |
| CHILLICOTHE HOUSE OF PRAYER | $10,000 |
| MEG FOUNDATION | $9,000 |
| BRAYMER C4 SCHOOL DISTRICT | $8,450 |
| Individual grant recipient | $8,000 |
| NORTHWEST MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY | $8,000 |
| LIVINGSTON COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY | $7,500 |
| BRAYMER FOOD PANTRY | $7,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL MISSOURI | $7,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY22–24, $16k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +14% since the first grant, against +1% for the ones you funded once.
49 repeat relationships — 24 still active in FY2025, 25 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- TMThe Meg Foundation3× · 2022–2025 · $31k · revenue +227%
- DMDES MOINES CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS2× · 2022–2023 · $21k · revenue +45%
- KBKICKING BEAR FOUNDATION3× · 2022–2024 · $16k · revenue +68%
Funded once
- HUHAMILTON UNITED METHODIST CHURCHone grant, 2023 · $39k
- BJBRAYMER JR LIVESTOCK SHOWone grant, 2022 · $25k
- WMWHITWORTH MINISTRIES INCone grant, 2022 · $19k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Mid-america christian university prepares students through a wesleyan perspective to create, collaborate, and innovate to solve local and global problems for the glory of god through jesus christ and the good of society.
Central christian college of kansas is a four-year, non-profit liberal arts college with the primary mission of offering a christ-centered education for character.
Greenville college d/b/a greenville university empowers students for lives of character and service through a transforming christ-centered education in the liberal arts, sciences, and professional studies.
Union college is a seventh-day adventist community of higher education, inspired by jesus christ, and dedicated to empowering students to learn, serve, and lead.
Evangel is a comprehensive christian university that is committed to excellence in educating and equipping students to become spirit empowered servants of god who will impact the church and society globally.
Engages, equips and empowers learners to explore their vocations, fulfill their potential and serve the world.
As an institution of higher education committed to the reformed christian perspective, dordt university equips students, alumni, and the broader community to work effectively toward christ-centered renewal in all aspects of contemporary…
Preparing people for a life of learning, work, and service for Christ and His kingdom.
As a christian university, we provide education and research opportunities preparing global leaders to partner with local communities.
True to our christian heritage, we prepare students from diverse religious, cultural, educational and economic backgrounds to live life fully.
Saint xavier university, a catholic institution inspired by the heritage of the sisters of mercy, educates persons to search for truth, think critically, communicate effectively and serve wisely and compassionately in support of human…
The mission of barclay college is to prepare students in a bible-centered environment for effective christian life, service, and leadership.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is William Jewell College and the most unlike its peers is Novo Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 34 years old; the field is 24. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 12% of your grantees by number, and just 6% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
33 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 33 of the 135 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation · Missouri Colleges Fund Inc · Mfa Oil Foundation · Greater Horizons · Tulsa Community Foundation · Community Fdn of Greater Des Moines F/K/A Greater Des Moines Community Fdn · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Servant Foundation · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization The Lloyd R Wallace Charitable Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Lloyd R Wallace Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Lloyd R Wallace Charitable 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.