Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Philbeck Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$66k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What you fund
0194% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20182025.

Education$87kReligion$79kHuman Services$47kHousing & Shelter$10kFood & Nutrition$10kRecreation & Sports$10kArts & Culture$5kCommunity Improvement$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $61k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NORTH CLEVELAND CHURCH OF GOD$25,000
MONROE PUBLIC SCHOOLS$15,835
Individual grant recipient$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
FELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ATHLETES$5,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY19–19, $14k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%NEW BEGINNINGS MERCY HOUSE: $2k → 10%MONROE COUNTY OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM: $12k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

04

Where the work is directed

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

About 11% of The Philbeck Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 84% of the giving stays in MI; read by stated purpose it is 77% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

The Philbeck Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

30%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$98k · 8 repeat orgs$229k 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
30

Total granted

$98k
$204k

Still filing today

0%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthOther

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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    4× · 2022–2025 · $31k
  • MP
    MONROE PUBLIC SCHOOLS
    3× · 2022–2025 · $27k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    2× · 2024–2025 · $15k

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $45k
  • SR
    STEWART ROAD CHURCH OF GOD
    one grant, 2024 · $25k
  • DH
    DEPT HEALTH HUMAN SERVICES
    one grant, 2019 · $20k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
05the grantee network

4 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 4 of the 39 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/4
Grantees still filing
2/4
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Individual grant recipient — $45,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient — $30,760 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMONROE PUBLIC SCHOOLS — $26,635 · OtherMONROE PUBLIC SCHOOLSSTEWART ROAD CHURCH OF GOD — $25,000 · OtherSTEWART ROAD CHURCH OF GODNORTH CLEVELAND CHURCH OF GOD — $25,000 · OtherNORTH CLEVELAND CHURCH OF GODDEPT HEALTH HUMAN SERVICES — $20,000 · OtherDEPT HEALTH HUMAN SERVICESIndividual grant recipient — $15,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $15,000 · OtherELEVATE CHURCH — $13,000 · OtherOAKS ACORN CHILDRENS VILLAGE — $12,000 · Other+26 more — $82,150 · Other+26 moreMONROE COUNTY OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM — $12,000 · Human ServicesNEW BEGINNINGS MERCY HOUSE — $2,000 · Human ServicesGABBY'S LADDER INC — $2,500 · Health
Other$309,545Human Services$14,000Health$2,500

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetMONROE COUNTY OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM — $12,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHabitat for Humanity of Monroe Inc — $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetGABBY'S LADDER INC — $2,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budget
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.

  • Who funds MONROE COUNTY OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM
  • Who funds Habitat for Humanity of Monroe Inc
  • Who funds GABBY'S LADDER INC
  • Who funds NEW BEGINNINGS MERCY HOUSE

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.

Edward M & Henrietta M Knabusch Charitable Trust 2TX13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Edward M & Henrietta M Knabusch Charitable Trust 2 · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Philbeck 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.

2025
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your 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
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 39 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph