Skip to content
Barnsley Emma Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Barnsley Emma Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$167k
Granted FY2025still arriving
20
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$30k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Animals$548kEducation$225kEnvironment$73kArts & Culture$10kFood & Nutrition$8k
02FY2025 · 20 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k18 grants · $112k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $55k
$7,500
Median grant
4
States reached
$2.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC$30,000
WEST TEXAS A & M UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$25,000
BIDEAWEE INC$8,000
BLUEBONNET EQUINE HUMANE SOCIETY INC$8,000
DUCKS UNLIMITED INC$8,000
DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE$8,000
AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION$7,500
AUSTIN PETS ALIVE$7,500
PINES AND PRAIRIES LAND TRUST$7,500
SPCA OF TEXAS$7,500
THE ANIMAL MEDICAL CENTER$5,000
WILDLIFE RESCUE OF CENTRAL TEXAS$5,000
SHADOW CATS RESCUE$5,000
ALVEUS SANCTUARY INC$5,000
HEARD SCIENCE MUSEUM WILDLIFE SANCTUARY$5,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 61% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ANIMAL TRACKS: $8k → 14%ATLANTIC MARINE CONSERVATION SOCIETY LTD: $7k → 7%LUCKY ORPHANS HORSE RESCUE: $10k → 9%BIDEAWEE INC: $8k → 17%INTERNATIONAL EXOTIC FELINE SANCTUARY IN: $10k → 8%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $25k → 9%PETER EMILY INTERNATIONAL VETERINARY DEN: $7k → 10%TAKE ME HOME ADVOCATES FOR TRANSPORT: $9k → 10%HUMANE SOCIETY OF NORTH TEXAS: $10k → 11%PINES AND PRAIRIES LAND TRUST: $10k → 12%TEXAS STATE AQUARIUM ASSOCIATION: $10k → 17%DUCKS UNLIMITED INC: $10k → 17%BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $10k → 9%SECOND CHANCE WILDLIFE RESCUE: $7k → 8%WEST TEXAS A & M UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $25k → 9%AUSTIN PETS ALIVE: $10k → 10%HUMANE SOCIETY OF NORTH TEXAS: $10k → 11%PINES AND PRAIRIES LAND TRUST: $8k → 12%SPCA OF TEXAS: $10k → 14%TEXAS A&M FOUNDATION: $30k → 22%DUCKS UNLIMITED INC: $8k → 17%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $25k → 9%AUSTIN PETS ALIVE: $8k → 10%HUMANE SOCIETY OF NORTH TEXAS: $8k → 11%PINES AND PRAIRIES LAND TRUST: $8k → 12%SPCA OF TEXAS: $8k → 14%TEXAS A&M FOUNDATION: $20k → 22%DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE: $8k → 14%DUCKS UNLIMITED INC: $8k → 17%WEST TEXAS A M UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $15k → 9%AUSTIN PETS ALIVE: $8k → 10%TEXAS A&M FOUNDATION: $20k → 22%DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE: $8k → 14%DUCKS UNLIMITED INC: $8k → 17%AUSTIN PETS ALIVE: $8k → 10%DALLAS PETS ALIVE: $10k → 14%DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE: $8k → 14%DUCKS UNLIMITED INC: $8k → 17%DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE: $8k → 14%ZSL AMERICA INC: $20k → 17%ZSL AMERICA INC: $10k → 17%AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION: $10k → 17%AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION: $8k → 17%AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION: $8k → 17%AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION: $8k → 17%AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION: $8k → 17%ZSL AMERICA INC: $20k → 17%ZSL AMERICA INC: $10k → 17%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

WA
NY
RI
CA
UT
CO
MD
TN
NC
DC
TX
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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$684k · 28 repeat orgs$178k to everyone else

28 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

28
13

Total granted

$684k
$103k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+20%
+49%

Still filing today

93%
92%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $75k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEducationEnvironmentArts & CultureOther
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

  • TA
    Texas A&M Foundation
    3× · 2020–2024 · $70k · revenue +54%
  • TA
    THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
    6× · 2020–2025 · $45k · revenue +37%
  • AP
    AUSTIN PETS ALIVE INC
    4× · 2020–2025 · $33k · revenue +112%

Funded once

  • WT
    WEST TEXAS A M UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2023 · $15k
  • IE
    INTERNATIONAL EXOTIC ANIMAL SANCTUARY
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +9%
  • BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +18%
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
Pom and the Hound Animal Refuge

Animal Welfare

—
2
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
3
The Humane Society of Austin & Travis County Inc

The austin humane society (ahs) offers comprehensive, humane, life-saving animal services, transforming the lives of animals and those who love them. because we believe homeless animals deserve a chance to thrive in a loving environment,…

Animals
4
Anas Safe Haven Rescue Inc

Animal Welfare

Animals
5
J-Lo's Animal Rescue & Sanctuary in

Animal care and rescue

Animals
6
Forever Wild Wildlife Rescue
Animals
7
One Tail At a Time West Texas

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…

Animals
8
Paws Claws Exotics

A sanctuary for unfortunate animals

—
9
Starfish Animal Rescue
Animals
10
The Animal Rescue League
Animals
11
Friends of Texas Panhandle Shelter Pets

Friends of Texas Panhandle Shelter Pets is a placement and transport rescue that works with small town panhandle shelters to help animals who are at risk of euthanasia get to rescues where they are adopted and loved.Our volunteers work…

Animals
12
Wild Souls Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Spca of Texas; the most unlike its peers is Pines and Prairies Land Trust. 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

47 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. 47 of the 52 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)
15
Early backer (in before they grew)
47/47
Grantees still filing
32/47
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ZSL AMERICA INC: $60,000 · AnimalsZSL AMERICA INCTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $45,000 · AnimalsTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALSAUSTIN PETS ALIVE INC: $32,500 · AnimalsAUSTIN PETS ALIVE INCHumane Society of North Texas: $32,500 · AnimalsHumane Society of North TexasDefenders of Wildlife: $30,500 · AnimalsDefenders of WildlifeBLUEBONNET EQUINE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $28,000 · AnimalsBLUEBONNET EQUINE HUMANE SOCIETY INCBIDEAWEE INC: $23,000 · AnimalsSPCA of Texas: $22,500 · AnimalsTexas Conservation Alliance: $20,000 · AnimalsSan Antonio Pets Alive Inc: $17,500 · Animals+27 more: $204,950 · Animals+27 moreTexas A&M Foundation: $70,000 · EducationTexas A&M FoundationTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC: $65,000 · EducationTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION…WEST TEXAS A&M UNIV FOUNDATION: $25,000 · EducationWEST TEXAS A&M UNIV F…WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · OtherWEST TEXAS A&M U…DUCKS UNLIMITED INC: $31,100 · OtherDUCKS UNLIMITED …WEST TEXAS A M UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $15,000 · OtherWEST TEXAS A M U…MEALS ON WHEELS SAN ANTONIO: $7,500 · OtherMEALS ON WHEELS …ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL OF NYC INC: $5,000 · OtherHEARD SCIENCE MUSEUM WILDLIFE SANCTUARY: $5,000 · OtherNEW BRAUNFELS COMMUNITY CAT COALITION: $5,000 · OtherBulverde Area Humane Society: $5,000 · OtherPINES AND PRAIRIES LAND TRUST: $25,000 · EnvironmentDucks Unlimited Inc: $15,500 · EnvironmentATLANTIC MARINE CONSERVATION SOCIETY LTD: $12,000 · EnvironmentTEXAS & SOUTHWESTERN CATTLE RAISERS' FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Arts & Culture
Animals$516,450Education$160,000Other$123,600Environment$52,500Arts & Culture$10,000

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 budgetTexas A&M Foundation: $70,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC: $65,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetZSL AMERICA INC: $60,000 over 4y, 28% of budgetTHE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $45,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetAUSTIN PETS ALIVE INC: $32,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHumane Society of North Texas: $32,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetDefenders of Wildlife: $30,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetBLUEBONNET EQUINE HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $28,000 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetPINES AND PRAIRIES LAND TRUST: $25,000 over 3y, 11% of budgetBIDEAWEE INC: $23,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetSPCA of Texas: $22,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTexas Conservation Alliance: $20,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetSan Antonio Pets Alive Inc: $17,500 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetDucks Unlimited Inc: $15,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetDALLAS PETS ALIVE: $15,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetSECOND CHANCE WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $13,050 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetANIMAL TRACKS INC: $12,500 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetATLANTIC MARINE CONSERVATION SOCIETY LTD: $12,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetTEXAS & SOUTHWESTERN CATTLE RAISERS' FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL EXOTIC ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL OF NEW YORK CITY INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetETOSHA RESCUE & ADOPTION CENTER: $10,000 over 2y, 4.0% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLucky Orphans Horse Rescue Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetTEXAS STATE AQUARIUM ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTAKE ME HOME ADVOCATES FOR TRANSPORT: $8,500 over 1y, 12% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS SAN ANTONIO: $7,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFOR ANIMALS INC: $7,500 over 2y, 3.7% of budgetPETER EMILY INTERNATIONAL VETERINARY DENTAL FOUNDATION: $7,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetAggieland Humane Society: $6,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetERIE COUNTY SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $6,400 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSHADOW CATS RESCUE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTURTLE RESCUE OF THE HAMPTONS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetPAWS of Grays Harbor: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetAPPALACHIAN WILDLIFE REFUGE: $5,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetWILDLIFE RESCUE OF CENTRAL TEXAS: $5,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetFARM SANCTUARY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNEW BRAUNFELS COMMUNITY CAT COALITION: $5,000 over 2y, 7.7% of budgetVintage Pet Rescue: $5,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF WICHITA COUNTY: $3,500 over 2y, 0.4% 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.

The Duffield Family F…The Summerlee Foundat…Best Friends Animal S…Petco LoveJames a Buddy Davidso…Petsmart Charities IncThe American Society …Greater Good CharitiesAetna Foundation IncAmy Shelton McNutt Ch…Shell USA Company Fou…BISSELL Pet Foundation
The Duffield Family Foundation Dba Maddie's FundCA22.4× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Duffield Family Foundation Dba Maddie's Fund · The Summerlee Foundation · Best Friends Animal Society · Petco Love · James a Buddy Davidson Charitable Foundation · Petsmart Charities Inc · The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals · Greater Good Charities · Aetna Foundation Inc · Amy Shelton McNutt Charitable Trust · Shell USA Company Foundation · BISSELL Pet Foundation

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 Barnsley Emma Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Barnsley Emma Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%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
    16report 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 52 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 Barnsley Emma’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