Skip to content
The Lords Great Commission East at a glance

· Private foundation

The Lords Great Commission East

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.

$171k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$86k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Religion$265kHousing & Shelter$36kPhilanthropy$32kHuman Services$25kArts & Culture$20kInternational$5kEducation$5kHealth$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $27k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $58k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $86k
$5,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$531k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHILD EVANGELISM FELLOWSHIP$86,033
LANCASTER BAPTIST CHURCH$25,000
MISSION REVIVAL$22,500
CHILD EVANGELISM FELLOWSHIP NEVADA$10,000
ASCENCIA$5,000
Monte Vista Grove Home$5,000
Eucon International University$5,000
FOSTERALL$5,000
CEF southern calif spanish chapter$3,600
ROLLING HILLS COVENANT CHURCH$3,000
OMF INTERNATIONAL$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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY21–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 44% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%ROLLING HILLS COVENANT CHURCH: $3k → 14%MISSION REVIVAL: $23k → 15%CHILD EVANGELISM FELLOWSHIP: $86k → 8%THE GIDEONS INTERNATIONAL: $135 → 14%OMF INTERNATIONAL: $1k → 8%First Choice Pregnancy Services: $2k → 13%ROLLING HILLS COVENANT CHURCH: $3k → 14%MISSION REVIVAL: $13k → 15%CEF International: $69k → 8%THE GIDEONS INTERNATIONAL: $90 → 14%OMF INTERNATIONAL: $1k → 8%Strong Tower Christian Center: $10k → 13%Monte Vista Grove Home: $5k → 14%MISSION REVIVAL: $13k → 15%CEF International: $51k → 8%OMF INTERNATIONAL: $1k → 8%A TIME TO DANCE INC: $10k → 13%ROLLING HILLS COVENANT CHURCH: $3k → 14%MISSION REVIVAL: $13k → 15%CEF International: $48k → 8%OMF INTERNATIONAL: $1k → 8%A TIME TO DANCE INC: $10k → 13%Monte Vista Grove Home: $5k → 14%MISSION REVIVAL: $13k → 15%CEF International: $35k → 8%OMF INTERNATIONAL: $500 → 8%ROLLING HILLS COVENANT CHURCH: $3k → 14%Monte Vista Grove Home: $4k → 14%ASCENCIA: $6k → 14%ASCENCIA: $5k → 14%ASCENCIA: $5k → 14%ASCENCIA: $5k → 14%LANCASTER BAPTIST CHURCH: $25k → 14%LANCASTER BAPTIST CHURCH: $11k → 14%LANCASTER BAPTIST CHURCH: $10k → 14%LANCASTER BAPTIST CHURCH: $10k → 14%LANCASTER BAPTIST CHURCH: $5k → 14%FOSTERALL: $5k → 14%FOSTERALL: $5k → 14%FOSTERALL: $5k → 14%DHAMMA USA: $500 → 14%Las Candelas: $1k → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

NV
CA
CO
MO
KS
TN
TX
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.
$481k · 13 repeat orgs$130k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 8 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

13
11

Total granted

$481k
$29k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
+63%

Still filing today

31%
36%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $101k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
ReligionHousing & ShelterYouth DevelopmentHuman 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

  • CI
    CEF International
    4× · 2021–2024 · $203k
  • MR
    MISSIONS REVIVAL INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $73k · revenue +95%
  • LB
    LANCASTER BAPTIST CHURCH
    5× · 2021–2025 · $61k

Funded once

  • ST
    Strong Tower Christian Center
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
  • TG
    TIKKUN GLOBAL MESSIANIC FAMILY
    one grant, 2021 · $6k
  • FO
    Fellowship of Israel Related Ministries Incgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue +408%
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
Christian Care Mesa Inc

Through christian love and excellence, we are dedicated to providing a fulfilling lifestyle and promoting independence to those we serve.

Human Services
2
Christian Care Mesa Ii Inc

Through christian love and excellence, we are dedicated to providing a fulfilling lifestyle and promoting independence to those we serve.

Housing & Shelter
3
National Church Residences At Home Health and Wellness Central Ohio

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors

—
4
National Church Residences At Home Central Ohio

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors.

—
5
National Church Residences At Home Hospice

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors

—
6
National Church Residences At Home Hospice Central Ohio

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors

—
7
Bethel Home Inc

Bethel home is part of a family of healthcare and residential service organizations committed to providing quality care and life-enriching opportunities to the aging and those in need in a caring, christian environment.

—
8
Miracle Hill Ministries Inc

Miracle hill ministries is committed to life transformation for children and adults experiencing homelessness. more information and program outcomes may be found at www.miraclehill.org.

Human Services
9
Childrens House International

Children's house international provides ethical adoption services, child focused recruitment, and family support. we support disadvantaged children with humanitarian aid in countries worldwide.

—
10
Burbank Housingsr Corporation

To own and operate affordable rental housing.

—
11
Mary's Shelter

Believing in the value of every life, mary's path empowers vulnerable teen mothers in foster care and their babies to create lives of dignity, hope and self-sufficiency.

Human Services
12
Altadena Community Church

Altadena Community Church is a faith-based religious organization operating as a non-profit organization with faith aligned with United Church of Christ.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Child Evangelism Fellowship Inc; the most unlike its peers is Las Candelas 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, 2017–2025.

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 27 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CEF International: $202,907 · OtherCEF InternationalLANCASTER BAPTIST CHURCH: $61,000 · OtherLANCASTER BAPTIST CHURCHCEF southern calif spanish chapter: $31,300 · OtherCEF southern calif spanish chapterFOSTERALL: $25,000 · OtherFOSTERALLA TIME TO DANCE INC: $20,000 · Other+17 more: $86,115 · Other+17 moreCHILD EVANGELISM FELLOWSHIP INC: $86,033 · Youth DevelopmentCHILD EVANGELIS…MISSIONS REVIVAL INC: $72,500 · ReligionMISSIONS REVIV…Fellowship of Israel Related Ministries Inc: $3,137 · ReligionASCENCIA: $20,700 · Housing & ShelterPATH: $2,500 · Human Services
Other$426,322Youth Development$86,033Religion$75,637Housing & Shelter$20,700Human Services$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$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMISSIONS REVIVAL INC: $72,500 over 5y, 5.5% of budgetFOSTERALL: $25,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetASCENCIA: $20,700 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetMONTE VISTA GROVE HOMES: $13,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFellowship of Israel Related Ministries Inc: $3,137 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPATH: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA BETTER CHOICE PREGNANCY SERVICES FIRST CHOICE PREGNANCY SERVICES: $2,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetLas Candelas Inc: $1,040 over 1y, 1.9% 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 CHILD EVANGELISM FELLOWSHIP INC ↗
  • Who funds MISSIONS REVIVAL INC ↗
  • Who funds FOSTERALL ↗
  • Who funds ASCENCIA ↗
  • Who funds MONTE VISTA GROVE HOMES ↗
  • Who funds Fellowship of Israel Related Ministries Inc ↗
  • Who funds PATH ↗
  • Who funds A BETTER CHOICE PREGNANCY SERVICES FIRST CHOICE PREGNANCY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds Las Candelas 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.

American Endowment Fo…Natl Christian Charit…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Endowment FoundationOH9.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Endowment Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · 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 The Lords Great Commission East funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Lords Great Commission East. 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
    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 · 0–40%
    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 The Lords Great Commission East?

    Find your warmest path to The Lords Great Commission East 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 27 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 Lords Great Commission East’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