Skip to content

· Private foundation

Wallace and June Blume Charitable Foundation

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.

$4.0M
Granted FY2025still arriving
35
Grants FY2025still arriving
15
States reached
$3.0M
Largest
01What it funds
0191% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$24MInternational$268kHuman Services$208kHousing & Shelter$97kCivil Rights$50kPhilanthropy$29kEducation$11kFood & Nutrition$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 35 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k27 grants · $84k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $80k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $221k
  • $250k+2 grants · $3.6M
$3,600
Median grant
15
States reached
$54M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RICK RENNER MINISTRIES$2,999,400
GRAND RAPIDS FIRST CHURCH$569,975
GRACE COMMUNITY CHURCH$220,600
TNT INTERNATIONAL MINISTRIES$35,500
GATEWAY CHURCH$13,000
COUNT ME IN$11,050
PIONEERS INTERNATIONAL$10,800
LIFE TOGETHER FOUNDATION$10,000
ETHNOS 360 INC$9,000
Individual grant recipient$7,500
HAROLD RITTER MINISTRIES (HRM IN)$7,000
6 STONES$6,000
GREAT COMMISSION EVANGELISTIC$6,000
MERCY HOUSE$6,000
FIRE FALL INTERNATIONAL$4,750
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 (FY20–25, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%OUR CALLING: $3k → 14%SPARROW'S NEST: $13k → 15%SPARROW'S NEST: $8k → 15%SPARROW'S NEST: $4k → 15%SPARROW'S NEST: $3k → 15%SPARROW'S NEST: $2k → 15%SPARROW'S NEST: $2k → 15%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

MN
WI
MI
NY
IA
IN
NJ
CA
CO
NE
MO
WV
VA
NM
TN
NC
SC
DC
OK
GA
TX
FL
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$25M · 45 repeat orgs$2.5M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +46% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

45 repeat relationships: 31 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

45
34

Total granted

$25M
$2.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+14%

Still filing today

22%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
ReligionEducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyHousing & ShelterPublic BenefitOther
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

  • MH
    MERCY HOUSE LIVING CENTERS
    7× · 2019–2025 · $78k · revenue +264%
  • FI
    FIREFALL INTERNATIONAL INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $30k · revenue +77%
  • TG
    THE GREAT COMMISSION EVANGELISTIC ASSOCIATION INC
    4× · 2020–2023 · $27k · revenue +11%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $2.1M
  • SS
    Shepherds Staff Mission Fac Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $200k · revenue +5%
  • TJ
    THE JOSEPH PROJECT
    one grant, 2019 · $100k
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
Salt With a Mission

Teach the ministry of christ

Religion
2
Spirit Invasion Ministries

Spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ

Religion
3
Gods Promise Ministries International

Religious Purposes

Housing & Shelter
4
The Rock Ministries

To preach the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ to the Nations

Human Services
5
One in the Spirit Ministries
Religion
6
Jesus in Vietnam Ministries
Religion
7
Todd Worldwide Ministries
Housing & Shelter
8
Refuge for Prodigals International Bible Ministries Inc
Religion
9
Puzzle Piece Ministries

To deliver the message of Jesus

Religion
10
Power Ministries International Inc
—
11
Discover Your Mission Inc

Supporing missionaries worldwide

Religion
12
Grateful Shepherd Ministries

Training pastors and leaders in christian faith

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ourcalling Inc; the most unlike its peers is Taylor Bears 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

23 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. 23 of the 83 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/23
Grantees still filing
16/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INTERNATIONAL GOOD NEWS CHURCH INC: $20,097,150 · OtherINTERNATIONAL GOOD NEWS CHURCH INCIndividual grant recipient: $2,093,550 · OtherIndividual grant recipientGRAND RAPIDS FIRST CHURCH: $1,904,202 · OtherGRAND RAPIDS FIRST CHURCHGRACE COMMUNITY CHURCH: $1,421,315 · Other+63 more: $1,318,656 · OtherShepherds Staff Mission Fac Inc: $200,000 · ReligionFIREFALL INTERNATIONAL INC: $29,600 · ReligionTHE GREAT COMMISSION EVANGELISTIC ASSOCIATION INC: $27,000 · ReligionSMP GLOBAL: $24,000 · ReligionFellowship of the Sword Inc: $20,000 · Religion+2 more: $4,300 · ReligionMERCY HOUSE LIVING CENTERS: $78,000 · Housing & ShelterSPARROW'S NEST INC: $32,250 · Human ServicesOURCALLING INC: $3,000 · Human ServicesCOVENANT CHRISTIAN ACADEMY: $5,500 · EducationDESTINY BUILDERS INC: $3,000 · EducationPURDUE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INC: $1,000 · EducationRESCUE HER INC: $4,800 · PhilanthropyTaylor Bears Inc: $1,075 · PhilanthropyMEALS ON WHEELS INC OF TARRANT COUNTY: $2,500 · Food & Nutrition
Other$26,834,873Religion$304,900Housing & Shelter$78,000Human Services$35,250Education$9,500Philanthropy$5,875Food & Nutrition$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 budgetShepherds Staff Mission Fac Inc: $200,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetMERCY HOUSE LIVING CENTERS: $78,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetSPARROW'S NEST INC: $32,250 over 6y, 4.3% of budgetFIREFALL INTERNATIONAL INC: $29,600 over 6y, 4.2% of budgetTHE GREAT COMMISSION EVANGELISTIC ASSOCIATION INC: $27,000 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetSMP GLOBAL: $24,000 over 6y, 8.8% of budgetFellowship of the Sword Inc: $20,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetMEL TROTTER MINISTRIES: $11,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetI CAN STILL SHINE INC: $9,700 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetCOVENANT CHRISTIAN ACADEMY: $5,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetRESCUE HER INC: $4,800 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetIN TOUCH MINISTRIES INC: $3,800 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetDESTINY BUILDERS INC: $3,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetOURCALLING INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS INC OF TARRANT COUNTY: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTaylor Bears Inc: $1,075 over 4y, 55% of budgetHOPE STREET MINISTRY INC: $1,010 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPURDUE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMUSEUM OF THE BIBLE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSTUDENTS STANDING STRONG: $500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSAMARITAN'S PURSE: $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 Shepherds Staff Mission Fac Inc ↗
  • Who funds MERCY HOUSE LIVING CENTERS ↗
  • Who funds SPARROW'S NEST INC ↗
  • Who funds FIREFALL INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds THE GREAT COMMISSION EVANGELISTIC ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds SMP GLOBAL ↗
  • Who funds Fellowship of the Sword Inc ↗
  • Who funds BILLY BANKS MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds MEL TROTTER MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds I CAN STILL SHINE 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.

Servant FoundationKS12× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Servant Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc

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 Wallace and June Blume Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wallace and June Blume Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 83 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 Wallace and June Blume’s filings →

    More from the funding graph