Skip to content
Baylor Agerton Trust Xxxxx8002 at a glance

· Private foundation

Baylor Agerton Trust Xxxxx8002

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$935k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$935k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Baylor Agerton Trust Xxxxx8002’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Community Foundation Of North Texas (Tax, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

2
’21
3
’22
4
’23
0
’24

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, FY2021 to 2024.

Philanthropy$935kEducation$57kHuman Services$25kFood & Nutrition$22kReligion$10kHousing & Shelter$5k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$934,926
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NORTH TEXAS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$934,926
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 (FY22–23, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%FORT WORTH HOPE CENTER: $5k → 11%COMMUNITY PARTNERS OF TARRANT COUNTY: $10k → 11%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.
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.

62%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$74k · 3 repeat orgs$45k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +111% since the first grant, against +24% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2023, 1 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
3

Total granted

$74k
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+111%
+24%

Still filing today

67%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23
EducationHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • TH
    THE HILL SCHOOL OF FORT WORTH INC
    3× · 2021–2023 · $30k · revenue -22%
  • TS
    THE SHAKEN BABY ALLIANCE
    2× · 2022–2023 · $27k · revenue +111%
  • RS
    REAL SCHOOL GARDENS
    2× · 2021–2022 · $17k

Funded once

  • CR
    CRISTO REY FORT WORTH CATHOLIC
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
  • FW
    FORT WORTH HOPE CENTER THE HOPE CENTER
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue -38%
  • DR
    DAY RESOURCE CENTER FOR HOMELESS
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +24%
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 9 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
3/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTH TEXAS (TAX: $934,926 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTH TEXAS (TAXTHE HILL SCHOOL OF FORT WORTH INC: $30,000 · EducationTHE SHAKEN BABY ALLIANCE: $27,251 · EducationREAL SCHOOL GARDENS: $17,054 · OtherTHE LADDER ALLIANCE: $15,000 · OtherCRISTO REY FORT WORTH CATHOLIC: $10,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY PARTNERS OF TARRANT COUNTY INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesFORT WORTH HOPE CENTER THE HOPE CENTER: $5,000 · Human ServicesDAY RESOURCE CENTER FOR HOMELESS: $5,000 · Community Improvement
Philanthropy$934,926Education$57,251Other$42,054Human Services$15,000Community Improvement$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTH TEXAS (TAX: $934,926 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetTHE HILL SCHOOL OF FORT WORTH INC: $30,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetTHE SHAKEN BABY ALLIANCE: $27,251 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetTHE LADDER ALLIANCE: $15,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY PARTNERS OF TARRANT COUNTY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetFORT WORTH HOPE CENTER THE HOPE CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDAY RESOURCE CENTER FOR HOMELESS: $5,000 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.

Thomas M Helen McKee …Sid W Richardson Foun…Community Foundation …Bnsf Railway Foundati…Communities Foundatio…Anna W Thornton & Ale…The C B Baird Jr Foun…Amon G Carter-Star Te…Helen Irwin Littauer …Amon G Carter Foundat…United Way of Tarrant…Fidelity Investments …
Thomas M Helen McKee & John P Ryan Fo John P Ryan Foundation IncTX17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Thomas M Helen McKee & John P Ryan Fo John P Ryan Foundation Inc · Sid W Richardson Foundation · Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · Bnsf Railway Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Anna W Thornton & Alexander P Thornton · The C B Baird Jr Foundation · Amon G Carter-Star Tele Emply Fund · Helen Irwin Littauer Educational Trust · Amon G Carter Foundation · United Way of Tarrant County · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Baylor Agerton Trust Xxxxx8002 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Baylor Agerton Trust Xxxxx8002. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    0get 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 · 0–25%
    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 9 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Baylor Agerton Trust Xxxxx8002’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