· Private foundation
Anne C & Joseph a Slicker 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k16 grants · $58k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $82k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CATTLE BARON'S BALL | $15,500 |
| WIPE OUT KIDS CANCER | $13,500 |
| ST MICHAEL ALL ANGELS EPISCOPAL | $13,000 |
| TIBETAN CENTER COMPASSION & WISDOM | $10,000 |
| PARKINSON'S RECOVERY PROJECT | $10,000 |
| THE AWARE FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| AMERICAN RED CROSS | $10,000 |
| WHISPERING WILLOWS SENIOR DOG | $5,000 |
| ANANDA LOS ANGELES | $5,000 |
| NEVERTHIRST | $5,000 |
| ALLEY CAT RESCUE | $5,000 |
| OPERATION KINDNESS | $5,000 |
| NINE GATES PROGRAM | $5,000 |
| SELF ENQUIRY LIFE FELLOWSHIP | $5,000 |
| CENTER FOR ECOZOIC STUDIES | $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 (FY17–25, $45k) 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 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +39% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
35 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 6 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, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $24k 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
- SESlicker Enterprise Foundation2× · 2020–2021 · $2.0M · revenue +405% · 100% of their budget
- TETHE EPISCOPAL SCHOOL OF DALLAS INC8× · 2017–2025 · $100k · revenue +20%
- WOWIPE OUT KIDS' CANCER INC6× · 2019–2025 · $76k · revenue +378%
Funded once
- EFEDUCATIONAL FIRST STEPSone grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue -46%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN ROGEL CANCERone grant, 2023 · $10k
- TCTIBETAN CENTER FOR COMPASSION AND WISDOMgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +65% · 26% of their budget
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 prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.
The aspca's mission, as stated by founder henry bergh in 1866, is "to provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the united states." the aspca was founded on the belief that animals are entitled to kind and…
The mission of take paws rescue is to meet the moral obligation to protect and save the lives of pets in need of rescue in louisiana. take paws rescue enacts this mission by pulling pets from rural and high kill shelters and preparing them…
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
A champion for animals since 1967, PAWS is a nationally recognized leader - rehabilitating injured and orphaned wildlife, sheltering and adopting homeless cats and dogs, and educating people to make a better world for animals and people.
Pet animal welfare society of ct (paws), established in 1962, is a no-kill animal rescue shelter dedicated to the rescue and adoption of our community's homeless and abused dogs and cats. paws efforts are focused on three critical needs:…
World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…
One tail at a time west texas otat wtx serves the rural communities of west texas by supporting animal shelter operations rescuing and sheltering homeless unwanted companion animals dogs and cats primarily arranging their veterinary care…
The pollination project foundation (tpp) provides catalytic seed funding to expert volunteers driving grassroots, community-led change around the world. grounded in heartivism - the practice of pairing compassion with action - tpp funds…
The organization is a no-kill animal rescue. paws saves lives and prevents suffering by implementing the no-kill philosophy through aggressive spay/neuter programs for owned and unowned animals. this is accomplished by rescuing, fostering,…
HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Give to Give Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Whispering Willows Senior Dog Sanctuary Inc. 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 30 years old; the field is 10. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 33% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% 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.
44 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. 44 of the 73 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 Slicker Enterprise Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds THE EPISCOPAL SCHOOL OF DALLAS INC ↗
- Who funds WIPE OUT KIDS' CANCER INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD ↗
- Who funds SELF ENQUIRY LIFE FELLOWSHIP ↗
- Who funds PRESTON HOLLOW PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH FDN ↗
- Who funds ROOM TO READ ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds SYNCHRONICITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds EDUCATIONAL FIRST STEPS ↗
- Who funds APPLE FARM COMMUNITY INC ↗
- Who funds UT SOUTHWESTERN HEALTH SYSTEMS ↗
- Who funds Malibu Gives ↗
- Who funds NEVERTHIRST INC ↗
- Who funds THE GIVE TO GIVE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TIBETAN CENTER FOR COMPASSION AND WISDOM ↗
- Who funds CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMUNITY PARTNERS INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PARKINSON VOICE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds BARN SANCTUARY ↗
- Who funds GIVE TO RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds Mosaic Multicultural Foundation ↗
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: Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · The Dallas Foundation · Horace C Cabe Foundation · The Perot Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Edward Jones Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation Inc
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 Anne C & Joseph a Slicker 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.
- Newburyport Art Association Inc — 1% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Anne C & Joseph a Slicker Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Anne C & Joseph a Slicker Foundation 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.