Skip to content
Waterstone Support Foundation Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Waterstone Support Foundation Inc

Support the religious, charitable, and educational tax-exempt purposes of christian community foundation and national foundation inc.

$26M
Granted FY2022
9
Grants FY2022
6
States reached
$23M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

72% of Waterstone Support Foundation Inc’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Christian Community Foundation Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 11 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year Waterstone Support Foundation Inc named its own grantees at scale: 7 organizations, $25M. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

11
’17
12
’18
8
’19
8
’20
10
’21
7
’22
8
’23
14
’24
11
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Philanthropy$81MRecreation & Sports$13MReligion$7.4MHealth$2.9MHuman Services$868kInternational$652kHousing & Shelter$415kEducation$267kOther$0
02FY2022 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $25,423,623, the rows itemized in this filing. The $26,054,030 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $630,407 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $22k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $559k
  • $250k+2 grants · $25M
$150,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$191M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$22,878,937
PREGNANCY CARE CLINIC$1,950,000
WILLIAM JESSUP UNIVERSITY$177,337
FAIRVIEW BAPTIST CHURCH$161,344
ROSS DILLON SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST$150,000
PROFESSIONAL CHRISTIAN COUNSELING SERVICES$70,549
ADAMS THERMAL FOUNDATION ETHIOPIA ACADEMIES$22,000
FOOTHILLS CHURCH$7,000
HOMEBRIDGE FINANCIAL SERVICES INC$6,456
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 (FY17–25, $939k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 45% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 9%GENERATEHOPE INC: $415k → 11%HUMAN COALITION: $10k → 5%GLOBAL CARE AND RESPONSE INC: $74k → 6%HELPING HANDS MINISTRIES INC: $8k → 13%PROFESSIONAL CHRISTIAN COUNSELING SERVICES: $71k → 6%GLOBAL CARE AND RESPONSE INC: $67k → 6%GLOBAL CARE AND RESPONSE INC: $64k → 6%GLOBAL CARE AND RESPONSE INC: $59k → 6%GLOBAL CARE AND RESPONSE INC: $58k → 6%GLOBAL CARE AND RESPONSE INC: $48k → 6%PROFESSIONAL CHRISTIAN COUNSELING SERVICES: $47k → 6%GLOBAL CARE AND RESPONSE INC: $17k → 6%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

ID
IL
WI
MI
SD
OH
PA
NJ
CA
CO
VA
TN
NC
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.

63%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$34M · 16 repeat orgs$20M to everyone else

16 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2022, 10 since wound down; 20 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
18

Total granted

$34M
$1.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
+48%

Still filing today

38%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 12% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.7M 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
ReligionHuman ServicesPhilanthropyInternationalArts & CultureRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • WS
    WATERSTONE SUPPORT FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $31M · revenue +144% · 69% of their budget
  • PC
    PROFESSIONAL CHRISTIAN COUNSELING S
    9× · 2017–2025 · $506k · revenue +93% · 32% of their budget
  • AT
    ADAMS THERMAL SYSTEMS FOUNDATION
    3× · 2019–2022 · $79k · revenue +25%

Funded once

  • OI
    OC International Support Foundation
    one grant, 2019 · $567k · revenue -78%
  • GI
    GENERATEHOPE INC
    one grant, 2017 · $415k · revenue +11% · 42% of their budget
  • RA
    Rough Acres Foundation
    one grant, 2018 · $210k · revenue -28%
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
WaterStone Real Estate Foundation

Encourage and Facilitate Donors to Achieve Christ-Centered Objectives by Providing Excellence in Personalized Charitable Giving Services and Education Resources

Philanthropy
2
Christian Foundation
—
3
National Christian Foundation -- Wisconsin Inc

Equipping followers of christ to give wisely to advance his kingdom by inspiring biblical stewardship and generosity.

Religion
4
National Foundation Inc

Encourage and Facilitate Donors to Achieve Christ-Centered Objectives by Providing Excellence in Personalized Charitable Giving Services and Education Resources

Philanthropy
5
Moriah Foundation

Support the purposes of christian community foundation, inc. d/b/a waterstone.

Philanthropy
6
Christianity Today International

Christianity Today is a global community inspired by evangelical conviction to advance the stories and ideas of the kingdom of God. Our mission is to elevate the storytellers and sages of the global church.

Religion
7
Christian Mission for the United Nations Community

Christian Mission for the United Nations Community is a ministry aimed at leading the head of every nation and other top leaders to faith in Jesus Christ and helping them to walk in dependence upon God as they discharge the…

—
8
CrossTalk Global

CrossTalk Global is a Christian educational organization that empowers and trains global church leaders to effectively communicate the Scriptures and share the hope of Christ in their communities. These projects are carried out in the USA…

Religion
9
Hexagon Foundation

Support the purpose of christian community foundation dba waterstone.

Religion
10
Practical Christianity Foundation
Religion
11
Christar International Inc

Christar international serves as a catalyst to the network of christar ministries by facilitating and encouraging partnerships with churches who sen dout men and women who proclaim the gospel for life-giving transformation in communitiesw…

Religion
12
Christian Research Institute Inc

The mission statement of the Christian Research Institute is to provide Christians worldwide with carefully researched information and well-reasoned answers that encourage them in their faith and equip them to intelligently represent it to…

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Christian Community Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is So They Can. 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

31 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. 31 of the 55 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
30/31
Grantees still filing
19/31
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $52,469,948 · PhilanthropyCHRISTIAN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INCWATERSTONE SUPPORT FOUNDATION INC: $30,777,899 · PhilanthropyWATERSTONE SUPPORT FOUNDATION INC+3 more: $109,255 · PhilanthropyOak Hill Retreat Center FKA Up There Down Here: $12,528,222 · Recreation & SportsOak Hill Retr…PREGNANCY CARE CLINIC: $1,950,000 · OtherROSS DILLON SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST: $1,235,000 · OtherFAIRVIEW BAPTIST CHURCH INC: $878,128 · OtherInstitute for Bible Reading: $199,972 · OtherWILLIAM JESSUP UNIVERSITY: $177,337 · Other+26 more: $544,330 · OtherRapha Foundation: $3,564,321 · ReligionOC International Support Foundation: $567,140 · ReligionRough Acres Foundation: $210,006 · Religion+4 more: $179,207 · ReligionPROFESSIONAL CHRISTIAN COUNSELING S: $505,674 · Human ServicesGENERATEHOPE INC: $415,000 · Human ServicesNATIONAL HOUSE OF HOPE INC: $45,000 · Human Services+2 more: $18,000 · Human ServicesPARENTS TELEVISION COUNCIL INC: $100,000 · Arts & CultureWINDRIDER INSTITUTE INC: $22,298 · Arts & CultureCompassion International Incorporated: $34,000 · InternationalSO THEY CAN: $20,000 · InternationalIRIS GLOBAL: $6,900 · InternationalAfrican Mission Healthcare Foundation: $6,109 · International
Philanthropy$83,357,102Recreation & Sports$12,528,222Other$4,984,767Religion$4,520,674Human Services$983,674Arts & Culture$122,298International$67,009

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCHRISTIAN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $52,469,948 over 7y, 7.5% of budgetWATERSTONE SUPPORT FOUNDATION INC: $30,777,899 over 2y, 69% of budgetPROFESSIONAL CHRISTIAN COUNSELING S: $505,674 over 9y, 32% of budgetGENERATEHOPE INC: $415,000 over 1y, 42% of budgetInstitute for Bible Reading: $199,972 over 2y, 11% of budgetWILLIAM JESSUP UNIVERSITY: $177,337 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetStaying True To Americas National Destiny Foundation Inc: $100,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetADAMS THERMAL SYSTEMS FOUNDATION: $79,250 over 3y, 4.1% of budgetWaterStone Supporting Org Trust 2: $63,207 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetWATERSTONE SUPPORTING ORGANIZATION TRUST 1: $46,448 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL HOUSE OF HOPE INC: $45,000 over 1y, 62% of budgetCompassion International Incorporated: $34,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCITIZENS DEFENDING FREEDOM FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWINDRIDER INSTITUTE INC: $22,298 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetCARY BROWN FAMILY FOUNDATION: $20,005 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSO THEY CAN: $20,000 over 2y, 9.4% of budgetGOOD NEWS COMMUNICATIONS INC: $15,702 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCALDWELL ACADEMY: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSalt Ventures NFP: $10,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetCorpus Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetHUMAN COALITION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMUSEUM OF THE BIBLE: $8,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHELPING HANDS MINISTRIES INC: $8,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIRIS GLOBAL: $6,900 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAfrican Mission Healthcare Foundation: $6,109 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSEEJESUSNET INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

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.

Christian Community F…Servant FoundationTyndale House Ministr…Natl Christian Charit…T Rowe Price Program …Shell USA Company Fou…Raymond James Charita…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…American Endowment Fo…Renaissance Charitabl…
Christian Community Foundation IncCO32.1× affinity17 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Christian Community Foundation Inc · Servant Foundation · Tyndale House Ministries · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · T Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving Inc · Shell USA Company Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Renaissance 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 Waterstone Support Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Waterstone Support Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • National House of Hope Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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 Waterstone Support Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Waterstone Support Foundation Inc 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 55 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Waterstone Support’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