Skip to content
Child Poverty Action Lab at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Child Poverty Action Lab

The CHILD POVERTY ACTION LAB exists to reduce child poverty in dallas by 50% within a single generation.

$4.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
43
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$1.5M
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, FY2019 to 2025.

Health$3.7MHuman Services$1.3MCommunity Improvement$1.0MPhilanthropy$934kEducation$593kCrime & Legal$489kPublic Safety & Disaster$316kHousing & Shelter$209kOther$0
02FY2025 · 43 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 43 grants below total $4,418,329, the rows itemized in this filing. The $4,512,134 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $93,805 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k22 grants · $497k
  • $50k–250k16 grants · $1.5M
  • $250k+4 grants · $2.5M
$41,336
Median grant
5
States reached
$27M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY$1,500,000
CONSULTORIO GENERAL HISPANO$417,618
GLC WELLNESS CENTER TEXAS LL$292,859
FOREST FORWARD$250,000
COMADRE TELEMEDICINE$230,044
HHM HEALTH$149,690
ITALY FAMILY PHARMACY INC$142,341
FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN$100,000
JUBILEE PARK & COMM CENTER$100,000
HUMAN RIGHTS INITIATIVE$100,000
HOLY CROSS OBGYN INC$94,290
WOMENS HEALTH CARE CENTER$85,493
TENISON WOMENS HEALTH CENTER$83,363
FOREMOST FAMILY HEALTH CENTER$64,852
UNITED PEOPLES COALITION$52,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY21–25, $550k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 88% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%KEEPING FAMILIES CONNECTED: $15k → 8%DOLLAR FOR: $50k → 9%JUBILEE PARK & COMM CENTER: $100k → 14%HUMAN RIGHTS INITIATIVE: $100k → 14%JUBILEE PARK & COMM CENTER: $50k → 14%JUBILEE PARK & COMM CENTER: $35k → 14%VIOLAS HOUSE: $25k → 14%FOR OAK CLIFF: $50k → 14%FOR OAK CLIFF: $50k → 14%BACHMAN LAKE TOGETHER: $75k → 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.

56%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.7M · 28 repeat orgs$3.6M to everyone else

28 repeat relationships: 22 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 21 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

28
21

Total granted

$4.7M
$1.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
0%

Still filing today

46%
76%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 49% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.3M went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEducationHealthCommunity ImprovementCivil RightsHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • MA
    Measure Austin
    2× · 2021–2024 · $285k · revenue +290% · 61% of their budget
  • C
    COMMIT2DALLAS
    2× · 2021–2022 · $205k · revenue +96%
  • TO
    THE OAK CLIFF VEGGIE PROJECT INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $67k · revenue +53% · 34% of their budget

Funded once

  • DE
    DALLAS EVICTION ADVOCACY CENTER
    one grant, 2023 · $250k · revenue -27%
  • TT
    TEXPROTECTS-THE TEXAS ASSOCIATION FOR THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN
    one grant, 2020 · $200k · revenue -51%
  • Southern Methodist University
    one grant, 2023 · $141k · revenue +14%
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
Downtown Dallas Inc

Downtown Dallas, Inc. (DDI), is the champion of a clean and safe Downtown and of the economic development and vibrancy of this community of diverse, unique neighborhoods. DDI: Mobilizes and amplifies the services of public agencies.…

—
2
Dallas Innovation Alliance

The Dallas Innovation Alliance (DIA) is a 501(c)(3) public-private consortium of public, private, civic and academia to support smart city initiatives in Dallas. Our definition of a Smart City is one at the intersection of community, data…

Community Improvement
3
Downtown Dallas Inc Foundation

Downtown Dallas, Inc. Foundation is the charitable arm of Downtown Dallas, Inc. whose purpose is to help make the area in and around Downtown Dallas a more vibrant and livable place for both daytime and permanent residents by promoting the…

Community Improvement
4
Progress Texas Institute

The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.

Civil Rights
5
Greater Dallas Momentum Foundation
Community Improvement
6
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.

—
7
Center for Public Policy Priorities

At the Every Texan, we believe in a Texas that offers everyone the chance to compete and succeed in life. We envision a Texas where everyone is healthy, well educated, and financially secure. We want the best Texas, a proud state that sets…

Public Benefit
8
Raise Texas

RAISE Texas advances equitable policies and programs that foster financial security and economic mobility for low- and moderate-income Texans. We equip, innovate and advocate to reduce disparities, remove barriers and build opportunities…

Human Services
9
Greenspace Dallas

Improving public and park land communities using educational and vocational training for underserved youth.

Environment
10
Child Poverty Action Lab

The child poverty action lab exists to reduce child poverty in dallas by 50% within a single generation.

—
11
Tarrant County Homeless Coalition

Tarrant County Homeless Coalition leads the community solution to homelessness in greater Tarrant and Parker counties by serving as a catalyst for community transformation.

Human Services
12
The Dallas County System of Services Inc

To unify services across Dallas County, to empower youth, strengthen families and build safe, healthy communities.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Dallas Foundation; the most unlike its peers is 4DWN Project Inc. 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

44 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. 44 of the 71 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
43/44
Grantees still filing
20/44
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CONSULTORIO GENERAL HISPANO: $741,322 · OtherCONSULTORIO GENERAL HISPANOCOMADRE TELEMEDICINE: $414,111 · OtherCOMADRE TELEMEDICINEGLC WELLNESS CENTER TEXAS LL: $375,548 · OtherGLC WELLNESS CENTER TEXAS LLTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTE: $275,000 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CE…ITALY FAMILY PHARMACY INC: $238,003 · OtherITALY FAMILY PHARMACY INCHOLY CROSS OBGYN INC: $165,928 · OtherNEXT GENERATION ACTION NETWORK FOUNDATION: $216,000 · OtherNEXT GENERATION ACTION NETWORK FOUNDATIONTEXPROTECTS-THE TEXAS ASSOCIATION FOR THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN: $200,000 · OtherGround Game Fund: $130,000 · Other+28 more: $1,109,186 · Other+28 moreTEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY: $1,500,000 · EducationTEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITYMeasure Austin: $285,000 · EducationMeasure AustinCOMMIT2DALLAS: $205,000 · EducationCOMMIT2DALLASSouthern Methodist University: $141,000 · EducationSouthern Methodist Universi…+3 more: $95,000 · EducationTHE DALLAS FOUNDATION: $834,000 · PhilanthropyTHE DALLAS …VolunteerNow: $100,000 · PhilanthropyVolunteerNo…+1 more: $10,000 · PhilanthropyFOREST FORWARD: $500,000 · Community ImprovementBuilders of Hope CDC: $80,000 · Community ImprovementTHE OAK CLIFF VEGGIE PROJECT INC: $67,000 · Community ImprovementBETTER BLOCK FOUNDATION: $50,000 · Community Improvement+1 more: $10,000 · Community ImprovementJUBILEE PARK & COMMUNITY CENTER CORPORATION: $185,000 · Human ServicesHUMAN RIGHTS INITIATIVE OF NORTH TEXAS INC: $100,000 · Human ServicesFOR OAK CLIFF: $100,000 · Human ServicesBACHMAN LAKE TOGETHER: $75,000 · Human ServicesLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF THE SOUTH INC: $50,000 · Human ServicesDOLLAR FOR: $50,000 · Human ServicesVIOLAS HOUSE: $25,000 · Human Services+2 more: $25,320 · Human ServicesHEALING HANDS MINISTRIES INC: $174,958 · HealthWOMEN'S HEALTHCARE CENTER: $99,964 · HealthMARTIN LUTHER KING JR FAMILY C FOREMOST FAMILY HEALTH CENTERS: $64,852 · HealthPARKLAND FOUNDATION: $63,200 · HealthAIDS ARMS INC: $41,336 · Health+2 more: $20,000 · HealthDALLAS EVICTION ADVOCACY CENTER: $250,000 · Housing & ShelterINCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES PROJECT: $50,000 · Housing & ShelterHEARTS AND HAMMERS - TWIN CITIES INC: $49,000 · Housing & Shelter
Other$3,865,098Education$2,226,000Philanthropy$944,000Community Improvement$707,000Human Services$610,320Health$464,310Housing & Shelter$349,000

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 budgetTEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY: $1,500,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE DALLAS FOUNDATION: $834,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetFOREST FORWARD: $500,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetMeasure Austin: $285,000 over 2y, 61% of budgetDALLAS EVICTION ADVOCACY CENTER: $250,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetCOMMIT2DALLAS: $205,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetTEXPROTECTS-THE TEXAS ASSOCIATION FOR THE PROTECTION OF CHILDREN: $200,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetJUBILEE PARK & COMMUNITY CENTER CORPORATION: $185,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetHEALING HANDS MINISTRIES INC: $174,958 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSouthern Methodist University: $141,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGround Game Fund: $130,000 over 1y, 4.2% of budgetVolunteerNow: $100,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS INITIATIVE OF NORTH TEXAS INC: $100,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetFOR OAK CLIFF: $100,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetWOMEN'S HEALTHCARE CENTER: $99,964 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetBuilders of Hope CDC: $80,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetNOT MY SON: $75,000 over 2y, 20% of budgetBACHMAN LAKE TOGETHER: $75,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetTHE OAK CLIFF VEGGIE PROJECT INC: $67,000 over 2y, 34% of budgetPARKLAND FOUNDATION: $63,200 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetFirst Step Staffing Inc: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBETTER BLOCK FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 2y, 3.2% of budgetLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF THE SOUTH INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDOLLAR FOR: $50,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetINCLUSIVE COMMUNITIES PROJECT: $50,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetHEARTS AND HAMMERS - TWIN CITIES INC: $49,000 over 2y, 5.9% of budgetBIG THOUGHT: $40,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGroundwork DFW: $30,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetMETHODIST HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION INC: $27,212 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetPOLICING EQUITY: $24,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDALLAS EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetDALLAS COMMUNITY LIGHTHOUSE: $10,320 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetAll Saints Health Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJPS FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTexas Health Resources Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 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.

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 Dallas FoundationCommunities Foundatio…United Way of Metropo…The Addy FoundationTexas Women's Foundat…Meadows Foundation IncBoone Family Foundati…Hillcrest FoundationHoblitzelle FoundationW P & Bulah Luse Foun…The Rees-Jones Founda…Texas Instruments Fou…
The Dallas FoundationTX35.6× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Dallas Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · United Way of Metropolitan Dallas Inc · The Addy Foundation · Texas Women's Foundation · Meadows Foundation Inc · Boone Family Foundation · Hillcrest Foundation · Hoblitzelle Foundation · W P & Bulah Luse Foundation · The Rees-Jones Foundation · Texas Instruments 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 Child Poverty Action Lab funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Child Poverty Action Lab. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 71 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 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 Child Poverty Action Lab’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