· Public charity
Children's Health System of Texas
To assist in the management of related 501(c)(3) organizations, that are a part of an integrated pediatric health care system with a mission to make life better for children.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2022.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 6 grants below total $246,140 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $253,733 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $7,593 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2022
- Under $10k1 grant · $6k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $45k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $195k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Ronald McDonald House of Dallas | $100,000 |
| North Texas Food Bank | $95,000 |
| The Crystal Charity Ball | $25,000 |
| Black Tie Dinner Inc | $10,000 |
| Kershaw's Challenge | $10,000 |
| Woman's Auxiliary to Children's Medical Center | $6,140 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY19–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 89% of your 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.
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 +32% since the first grant, against +30% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2022, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (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 FY2022, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $111k 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
- RMRonald McDonald House of Dallas Inc4× · 2019–2022 · $250k · revenue +55%
- CCChildren's Cancer Fund of Dallas inc2× · 2020–2021 · $75k · revenue +162%
- TCTHE CRYSTAL CHARITY BALL3× · 2020–2022 · $75k · revenue +32%
Funded once
- MOMUSICIANS ON CALL INCgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $225k · revenue +30%
- UWUNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN DALLAS INCone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue -14%
- DRDallas Regional Chamberone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +19%
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 lead and serve in the moments that matter the most for the people of dallas.
The mission of the dallas county medical society is to promote public health and advocate for physicians and their relationship with patients, while upholding professionalism in the practice of medicine.
Young Texans Against Cancer is a network of motivated young professionals collectively working together to raise awareness and funds to support the local Dallas cancer community. The Dallas chapter was established in 2007, as part of a…
The mission of the Dallas-Fort Worth Hospital Council is to drive evidence-based improvement in patient care and health equity throughout the region.
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.
To build and maintain donor relationships in order to raise, manage, and distribute funds to assist Methodist Health System in acquiring state-of-the-art technology, attracting excellent medical staff, and supporting vital hospital…
The Dallas Bar Association is a nonprofit corporation chartered by the State of Texas to protect and advance the professional interests of persons licensed to practice law in the Dallas area, to improve the relations between the Bench, the…
Dallas county indigent care corporation, (dcicc) a texas nonprofit membership corporation, is organized and operated exclusively for charitable and educational purposes within the meaning of section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code…
The dcms foundation's mission is to improve the quality and distribution of health services throughout dallas county.
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…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dallas Regional Chamber and the most unlike its peers is Dirk Nowitzki Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 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.
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 Ronald McDonald House of Dallas Inc ↗
- Who funds MUSICIANS ON CALL INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds Children's Cancer Fund of Dallas inc ↗
- Who funds THE CRYSTAL CHARITY BALL ↗
- Who funds JUNIOR LEAGUE OF DALLAS INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN DALLAS INC ↗
- Who funds BLACK TIE DINNER INC ↗
- Who funds Dallas Regional Chamber ↗
- Who funds KERSHAW'S CHALLENGE ↗
- Who funds DIRK NOWITZKI FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WOMENS AUXILIARY TO THE CHILDRENS MEDICAL CENTER ↗
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 · Children's Health System of Texas · Texas Instruments Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Children's Health System of Texas 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.
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.