Skip to content
Virginia C Koboldt Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Virginia C Koboldt Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$105k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Human Services$321kPhilanthropy$71kCrime & Legal$52kCommunity Improvement$42kFood & Nutrition$33kHealth$33kReligion$27kYouth Development$25kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k11 grants · $50k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $55k
$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CATHOLIC CHARITIES DIOCESE OF$20,000
EFFINGHAM CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER$15,000
CASA OF EFFINGHAM COUNTY$10,000
COMMUNITY SUPPORT SYSTEMS$10,000
SE ILLINOIS COMMUNITY FNDN$9,000
EFFINGHAM CITY-COUNTY CMTE$5,000
ENDURING FREEDOM MINITRIES INC$5,000
BALLARD FAMILY NATURE CENTER INC$5,000
LITTLE HEARTS EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER$5,000
MID-ILLINOIS BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS$5,000
SEXUAL ASSAULT & FAMILY EMERGENCIES$4,500
STRATEGIC TRAINING & RESTORATON$3,500
HOSPITAL SISTERS OF ST FRANCIS FDTN$3,500
CRISIS NURSERY OF EFFINGHAM COUNTY$2,500
JOLENE AREND GIVING FUND$2,000
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 (FY19–25, $141k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%MATTOON AREA FAMILY YMCA: $500 → 18%EFFINGHAM COUNTY FISH HUMAN SERVICES: $18k → 9%EFFINGHAM COUNTY FISH HUMAN SERVICES: $18k → 9%EFFINGHAM CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $15k → 9%EFFINGHAM COUNTY FISH HUMAN SERVICES: $14k → 9%EFFINGHAM COUNTY FISH HUMAN SERVICES: $14k → 9%EFFINGHAM COUNTY FISH HUMAN SERVICES: $10k → 9%FAMILY LIFE CENTER INC: $7k → 9%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC: $5k → 9%CEFS ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY CORP: $4k → 9%EFFINGHAM CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $4k → 9%CEFS Economic Opportunity Corp: $3k → 9%EFFINGHAM CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $3k → 9%CEFS ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY CORP: $3k → 9%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $3k → 9%EFFINGHAM CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $3k → 9%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $3k → 9%EFFINGHAM CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $3k → 9%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC: $3k → 9%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC: $2k → 9%BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK: $2k → 9%FAMILY LIFE CENTER: $2k → 9%FAMILY LIFE CENTER INC: $2k → 9%FAMILY LIFE CENTER: $1k → 9%FAMILY LIFE CENTER: $1k → 9%FAMILY LIFE CENTER: $1k → 9%EFFINGHAM CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $1k → 9%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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$619k · 38 repeat orgs$51k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +38% since the first grant, against -60% for those funded once.

38 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2025, 23 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

38
27

Total granted

$619k
$51k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+38%
-60%

Still filing today

34%
11%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthEnvironmentPublic Safety & DisasterCommunity ImprovementYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • CS
    COMMUNITY SUPPORT SYSTEMS INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $97k · revenue +76%
  • EC
    EFFINGHAM COUNTY FISH HUMAN SERVICES
    5× · 2020–2024 · $73k · revenue +84%
  • CO
    CASA of Effingham County
    7× · 2019–2025 · $31k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • F
    FISH
    one grant, 2019 · $15k
  • HS
    HSHS ST ANTHONY'S FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $4k
  • HS
    HOSPITAL SISTERS OF ST ANTHONY'S FDTN
    one grant, 2022 · $3k
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
Illinois Institute for Children

Providing Social Services to Families including Child Care

Human Services
2
Effingham Animal Rescue Sanctuary

None

Animals
3
Chittenango Child Care Center Inc

To provide quality child care

—
4
Lifesteps Inc

Helping individuals and families with life's changing needs by providing programs and services which will improve their quality of life.

Education
5
Family Cares Afc Mission

Providing partner for illinois department of human services for afterschool programming

Human Services
6
Evangelical Child and Family Agency

Entity provides quality social services and compassionate care to abused, neglected, and dependent children, and improves the quality of life through adoption counseling, and intact family services.

Human Services
7
Family Services Center of Calhoun County Inc

To protect children, preserve families, and provide need based services either directly or through referral to strengthen and support families.

Human Services
8
Community Action of Southern Kentucky Inc

We team with Community partners to provide human services with dignity and respect, empowering people in Southern Kentucky to achieve stability and economic security.

—
9
Illinois Children's Healthcare Foundation
Human Services
10
Eastern Illinois Foodbank

Eastern illinois foodbank exists to alleviate hunger in eastern illinois by providing a reliable source of food for the hungry through cooperation with a network of food pantries and agencies.

Food & Nutrition
11
Central Illinois Services

To foster low income housing, develop and promote affordable homeownership and rental opportunities, support community develpment, social services, and educational opportunities for individuals and families throughout menard county and the…

—
12
Community Needs of Chillicothe Illinois Inc

Provide temporary assistance to needy individuals. Primary assistance with rent, utilities and food.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Effingham County Fish Human Services; the most unlike its peers is Ballard Family Nature Center 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

18 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. 18 of the 66 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/18
Grantees still filing
13/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMUNITY SUPPORT SYSTEMS INC: $97,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY SUPPORT SYSTEMS INCCATHOLIC CHARITIES DIOCESE OF: $65,000 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITIES DIOCESE OFSE ILLINOIS COMMUNITY FNDN: $46,000 · OtherSE ILLINOIS COMMUNITY FNDNEFFINGHAM CATHOLIC CHARITIES: $32,000 · OtherEFFINGHAM CATHOLIC CHARITIESCASA of Effingham County: $30,500 · OtherCASA of Effingham CountyEFFINGHAM CITY COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING: $18,500 · Other+48 more: $188,450 · Other+48 moreEFFINGHAM COUNTY FISH HUMAN SERVICES: $72,500 · Human ServicesEFFINGHAM COUNTY FISH H…EFFINGHAM CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $27,800 · Human ServicesEFFINGHAM CHILD DEVELOP…BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC: $17,000 · Human ServicesBLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK…THE FAMILY LIFE PREGNANCY CARE CENTER INC: $13,300 · Human ServicesTHE FAMILY LIFE PREGNAN…CEFS ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY CORPORATION: $10,000 · Human ServicesCEFS ECONOMIC OPPORTUNI…+1 more: $500 · Human ServicesCRISIS NURSERY OF EFFINGHAM COUNTY: $12,500 · HealthHEARTLAND HUMAN SERVICES: $7,500 · HealthBALLARD FAMILY NATURE CENTER INC: $16,000 · EnvironmentMID-IL BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS: $13,500 · Youth DevelopmentSOUTHEASTERN ILLINOIS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $7,250 · PhilanthropyEFFINGHAM COUNTY SEARCH AND RESCUE NFP: $2,500 · Public Safety & Disaster
Other$477,450Human Services$141,100Health$20,000Environment$16,000Youth Development$13,500Philanthropy$7,250Public Safety & Disaster$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$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOMMUNITY SUPPORT SYSTEMS INC: $97,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetEFFINGHAM COUNTY FISH HUMAN SERVICES: $72,500 over 5y, 18% of budgetCASA of Effingham County: $30,500 over 7y, 4.2% of budgetEFFINGHAM CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $27,800 over 6y, 1.4% of budgetEFFINGHAM CITY COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING: $18,500 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetBLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC: $17,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetBALLARD FAMILY NATURE CENTER INC: $16,000 over 7y, 1.2% of budgetMID-IL BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS: $13,500 over 4y, 2.7% of budgetTHE FAMILY LIFE PREGNANCY CARE CENTER INC: $13,300 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetCRISIS NURSERY OF EFFINGHAM COUNTY: $12,500 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetCEFS ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY CORPORATION: $10,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHEARTLAND HUMAN SERVICES: $7,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSOUTHEASTERN ILLINOIS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $7,250 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEFFINGHAM COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY: $2,500 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetEFFINGHAM COUNTY SEARCH AND RESCUE NFP: $2,500 over 2y, 55% of budgetDIETERICH COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetEL SHADDAI HOMES: $1,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMATTOON AREA FAMILY YMCA CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION: $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 COMMUNITY SUPPORT SYSTEMS INC ↗
  • Who funds EFFINGHAM COUNTY FISH HUMAN SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds CASA of Effingham County ↗
  • Who funds EFFINGHAM CHILD DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
  • Who funds EFFINGHAM CITY COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING ↗
  • Who funds BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC ↗
  • Who funds BALLARD FAMILY NATURE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds MID-IL BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS ↗
  • Who funds THE FAMILY LIFE PREGNANCY CARE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds CRISIS NURSERY OF EFFINGHAM COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds CEFS ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds HEARTLAND HUMAN SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHEASTERN ILLINOIS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds EFFINGHAM COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY ↗

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.

Southeastern Illinois…United Way of Effingh…Midland States Bank F…Niebrugge Cares Found…Jx Gives Back Family …The Lumpkin Family Fo…American Online Givin…Amazonsmile FoundationFidelity Investments …
Southeastern Illinois Community FoundationIL43.1× affinity18 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Southeastern Illinois Community Foundation · United Way of Effingham Cnty Inc · Midland States Bank Foundation · Niebrugge Cares Foundation · Jx Gives Back Family Foundation Inc · The Lumpkin Family Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Virginia C Koboldt Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Virginia C Koboldt Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%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
    9report 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.

    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 66 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 Virginia C Koboldt’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