· Private foundation
Anna W Thornton & Alexander P Thornton
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k9 grants · $51k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $40k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Big Brothers Big Sisters Lone Star | $10,000 |
| SPECIAL OLYMPICS TEXAS INC | $10,000 |
| FORT WORTH PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| WINGS OF A BUTTERFLY | $10,000 |
| HILL SCHOOL OF FORT WORTH INC | $7,500 |
| NATIONAL SOCIETY TO PREVENT BLINDNESS | $6,500 |
| THE PARENTING CENTER | $6,500 |
| FORT WORTH AREA HABITATFOR HUMANITY | $5,000 |
| CRAZY8 MINISTRIES | $5,000 |
| SHAKEN BABY ALLIANCE | $5,000 |
| CASA OF TARRANT COUNTY | $5,000 |
| GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION | $5,000 |
| HOPE SUPPLY CO | $5,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $111k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +41% since the first grant, against +1% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- TPTHE PARENTING CENTER5× · 2020–2025 · $73k · revenue +53%
- TSTHE SHAKEN BABY ALLIANCE6× · 2020–2025 · $60k · revenue +45%
- SOSPECIAL OLYMPICS OF TEXAS INC5× · 2020–2025 · $52k · revenue +88%
Funded once
- JCJEWEL CHARITY BALL INCORPORATEDone grant, 2023 · $33k · revenue +2%
- CHCASSATA HIGH SCHOOLone grant, 2018 · $20k
- EVESSILOR VISION FOUNDATIONone grant, 2020 · $18k · revenue -77%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To make tomorrow better than today by supporting and empowering children, youth, and families involved with child protective services.
To provide family services and to provide residential child care for dependent children where there is a need to assist children and families disrupted by problems.
To strengthen the lives of children and families.
The mission of Dallas County Family Resource Center is to provide programs to improve the quality of resources and well-being of the children and families in the community by intake, assessment, and referral of those in need to available…
Texans Care for Children shapes public policies and brings Texans together to make children a statewide priority. We work so kids can have what they need to be healthy, secure, and thriving and so every Texan can have the best start to…
CASA of Williamson County, TX exists to empower community volunteers to advocate for children who have experienced abuse or neglect to find loving, safe, and permanent homes.
The mission of the Fort Worth Hope Center is to fight hunger and feed hope by meeting peoples' immediate nutrition needs while also helping as many as possible to become self-sufficient. To this end, we provide both groceries and household…
The mission of Dallas Services is to enable individuals with disabilities and other special needs to achieve their potential by fostering community inclusiveness and independence.
Provide christmas toys and school uniforms to children
Fort Bend County Child Advocates, Inc. provides a voice, heals the hurt and breaks the cycle of abuse and neglect for children in Fort Bend County.
Mission: Texas Parent to Parent is committed to improving the lives of Texas children who have disabilities, chronic or mental health conditions and/or other health care needs. We accomplish this by empowering families to be strong…
At fort worth colonial charities, we are dedicated to empowering the next generation through innovative educational, athletic, and enrichment programs supported by our investment. we believe in fostering not just skills, but confidence and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Casa of Tarrant County Inc and the most unlike its peers is Immunization Collaboration of Tarrant County. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 41 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 27% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 16% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
25 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 25 of the 30 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 THE PARENTING CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE SHAKEN BABY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS OF TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS CENTER FOR ARTS ACADEMICS ↗
- Who funds JEWEL CHARITY BALL INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds THE HILL SCHOOL OF FORT WORTH INC ↗
- Who funds NEW KEY SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds Wings of a Butterfly ↗
- Who funds DAY RESOURCE CENTER FOR HOMELESS ↗
- Who funds BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS LONE STAR ↗
- Who funds CASA OF TARRANT COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds ESSILOR VISION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Prevent Blindness Georgia ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY STOREHOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY PARTNERS OF TARRANT COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds THE GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION ↗
- Who funds THE FORT WORTH PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ARLINGTON PREGNANCY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Mission Central Metroplex Inc ↗
- Who funds FORT WORTH AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗
- Who funds CRAZY8 MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds ARLINGTON CHARITIES INC ↗
- Who funds IMMUNIZATION COLLABORATION OF TARRANT COUNTY ↗
- Who funds HOPE SUPPLY CO ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF TARRANT COUNTY ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Thomas M Helen McKee & John P Ryan Fo John P Ryan Foundation Inc · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Sid W Richardson Foundation · Helen Irwin Littauer Educational Trust · Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · Ann L Rhodes and Carol Greene Rhodes · Bnsf Railway Foundation · Edith Winther Grace Charitable Trust · Garvey Texas Foundation Inc · Amon G Carter Foundation · Wm & Catherine Bryce Memorial Fund Xxxxx3001 · Crystelle Waggoner Charitable Trust
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 Anna W Thornton & Alexander P Thornton 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.
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.