Skip to content
Belmont Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Belmont Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$235k
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$95k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Arts & Culture$662kEducation$598kRecreation & Sports$353kHealth$235kHuman Services$234kCommunity Improvement$100kPhilanthropy$69kPublic Safety & Disaster$55kOther$0
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $7k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $133k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $95k
$18,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$50k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
12TH MAN FOUNDATION$95,000
IRVING SCHOOLS FOUNDATION$32,000
ARKANSAS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$28,000
ROARING GAP FOUNDATION$25,000
IRVING SCHOOLS FOUNDATION$20,000
IRVING SCHOOLS FOUNDATION$18,000
TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION$10,000
PAT MATHERS SCHOLARSHIP FUND$5,000
EDGEMERE CHAPEL$1,000
ST JUDE CHILDREN RESEARCH HOSPITAL$500
ST JUDE CHILDREN RESEARCH HOSPITAL$500
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 (FY17–20, $55k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%PAT MATHERS SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION: $5k → 14%PAT MATHERS SCHOLARSHIP FUNDATION: $5k → 14%PAT MATHERS SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION: $5k → 14%BRIGHTER TOMORROWS: $25k → 14%BRIGHTER TOMORROWS: $15k → 14%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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 20 repeat orgs$559k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +55% since the first grant, against +27% for those funded once.

20 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
16

Total granted

$1.7M
$518k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%
+27%

Still filing today

50%
31%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $41k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • IS
    IRVING SCHOOLS FOUNDATION
    4× · 2017–2024 · $328k · revenue +184%
  • TA
    Texas A&M University 12th Man Foundation
    5× · 2017–2024 · $253k · revenue +55%
  • UO
    University of Dallas
    2× · 2017–2018 · $100k · revenue +36%

Funded once

  • BI
    BAYLOR IRVING HEATHCARE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $133k
  • TO
    THE ONESTAR FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $100k · revenue -94%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $50k
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
The University of TexasTexas a&M Investment Management Company

To generate superior long-term investment returns to support The University of Texas and Texas A&M University systems as they provide world-class teaching, push the boundaries of discovery, and achieve excellence in patient healthcare for…

Education
2
Dallas Seminary Foundation

To support the mission of Dallas Theological Seminary by offering charitable planned giving and other related services to friends of the Seminary.

Education
3
Dallas College Foundation Inc

Dallas college foundation enhances the level of achievement and excellence of dallas college by providing scholarships, eliminating barriers that prevent students from attending and graduating, and supporting innovation.

Education
4
Dallas International University

As a christian university, we provide education and research opportunities preparing global leaders to partner with local communities.

Education
5
Communities Foundation of Texas Inc

The foundation is committed to serving charitable needs both domestically and abroad through charitable grants and services at the discretion of the board of trustees.

Philanthropy
6
Irving Healthcare Foundation

To foster and support the activities and purposes of Baylor Medical Center at Irving, to encourage broad-based public support, and to advance its medical objectives including sponsorship of patient care, research, and educational and…

Health
7
Aclu Foundation of Texas Inc

The ACLU Foundation of Texas is the unyielding guardian and promoter of freedom, justice, equality and dignity of all people, particularly for those who are still fighting to secure the full exercise of their civil rights and liberties.…

Civil Rights
8
Texas a&M Research Foundation

To facilitate research and development within the texas a&m university system and selected other entities.

Education
9
Trellis Foundation

We believe every texas student deserves the opportunity to earn a postsecondary credential or degree that helps them achieve the future they envision for themselves and their families. we invest in the programs, practices, and policies…

Human Services
10
Dallas-Fort Worth Hospital Council

The mission of the Dallas-Fort Worth Hospital Council is to drive evidence-based improvement in patient care and health equity throughout the region.

—
11
Internet Society Foundation

At the internet society foundation, we focus on funding initiatives that strengthen the internet in function and reach so that it can effectively serve all people. our work advances the vision of the internet society (isoc): the internet…

International
12
The Association of Former Students of Texas a&M University

To strengthen the association of former students, promote the interests and welfare of texas a&m university, perpetuate ties of affection and esteem formed in university or college days, and serve the student body.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Irving Schools Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Pat Mathers Scholarship Foundation. 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

19 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. 19 of the 41 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/19
Grantees still filing
12/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

IRVING SCHOOLS FOUNDATION: $328,000 · OtherIRVING SCHOOLS FOUNDATIONBAYLOR IRVING HEATHCARE FOUNDATION: $133,000 · OtherBAYLOR IRVING HEATHCARE FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient: $50,000 · OtherSALVATION ARMY-IRVING: $50,000 · OtherCURE FOR ALL SEASONS: $50,000 · OtherTHE CATHOLIC FOUNDATION: $40,000 · OtherIRVING FAMILY ADVOCACY CNTR INC: $40,000 · Other+22 more: $291,250 · Other+22 moreLYRIC STAGE INC: $650,000 · Arts & CultureLYRIC STAGE INCTexas A&M University 12th Man Foundation: $253,080 · EducationTexas A&M Universit…University of Dallas: $100,000 · EducationUniversity of Dalla…Texas A&M Foundation: $25,000 · EducationTexas A&M Foundatio…+2 more: $20,000 · EducationIrving Cares Inc: $68,750 · Human ServicesBRIGHTER TOMORROWS INC: $40,000 · Human ServicesPAT MATHERS SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION: $15,000 · Human ServicesTHE ONESTAR FOUNDATION: $100,000 · Community ImprovementIRVING POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE: $50,000 · Youth DevelopmentThe Independence Fund Inc: $32,000 · Public Benefit
Other$982,250Arts & Culture$650,000Education$398,080Human Services$123,750Community Improvement$100,000Youth Development$50,000Public Benefit$32,000

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 budgetLYRIC STAGE INC: $650,000 over 5y, 31% of budgetIRVING SCHOOLS FOUNDATION: $328,000 over 4y, 15% of budgetTexas A&M University 12th Man Foundation: $253,080 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ONESTAR FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetUniversity of Dallas: $100,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetIrving Cares Inc: $68,750 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetIRVING POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE: $50,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetBRIGHTER TOMORROWS INC: $40,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetIRVING FAMILY ADVOCACY CNTR INC: $40,000 over 2y, 7.8% of budgetThe Independence Fund Inc: $32,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetARKANSAS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $28,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTexas A&M Foundation: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE TEACHING TRUST: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetPAT MATHERS SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 3y, 13% of budgetSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDURHAM ACADEMY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE LIFESPACE FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $2,000 over 3y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds LYRIC STAGE INC ↗
  • Who funds IRVING SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Texas A&M University 12th Man Foundation ↗
  • Who funds THE ONESTAR FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds University of Dallas ↗
  • Who funds Irving Cares Inc ↗
  • Who funds IRVING POLICE ATHLETIC LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds BRIGHTER TOMORROWS INC ↗
  • Who funds IRVING FAMILY ADVOCACY CNTR INC ↗
  • Who funds The Independence Fund Inc ↗
  • Who funds ARKANSAS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Texas A&M Foundation ↗
  • Who funds THE TEACHING TRUST ↗
  • Who funds PAT MATHERS SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds DURHAM ACADEMY INC ↗
  • Who funds THE LIFESPACE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗

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.

Communities Foundatio…The Dallas FoundationThe Aileen and Jack P…Texas Instruments Fou…McKesson Foundation I…The Blackbaud Giving …The Ayco Charitable F…Raymond James Charita…National Philanthropi…Charities Aid Foundat…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…
Communities Foundation of Texas IncTX25.8× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · The Dallas Foundation · The Aileen and Jack Pratt Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · McKesson Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust 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 Belmont Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Belmont Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report 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.

    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 41 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 Belmont’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