· Private foundation
Chrest Foundation Inc
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k5 grants · $95k
- $50k–250k19 grants · $1.6M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Recidiviz Inc | $150,000 |
| Lone Star Justice Alliance | $100,000 |
| Montana Wilderness Association Inc | $100,000 |
| Southern Methodist University | $100,000 |
| Western Resource Advocates | $100,000 |
| Trust for Public Land | $100,000 |
| Trust for Public Land | $100,000 |
| Colorado Fourteeners Initiative | $100,000 |
| Texas Public Policy Foundation | $100,000 |
| Glacier National Park Conservancy | $100,000 |
| Protect Our Winters | $100,000 |
| World Wildlife Fund Inc | $100,000 |
| Conservation Colorado Education Fund | $60,000 |
| Georgia Center for Opportunity | $50,000 |
| Southwest Energy Efficiency Project | $50,000 |
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.
Your US giving — 79% of grant dollars ($6.8M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 21% that went abroad ($1.8M) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY21–24, $55k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those 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.
Which US states your grants reach
Beyond the US — 21% of all-years giving ($1.8M)
1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 6% of Chrest Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 30% of the giving stays in TX; read by stated purpose it is 32% — more of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +33% since the first grant, against -1% for the ones you funded once.
28 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $435k 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
THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND5× · 2020–2024 · $775k · revenue +113%- TPTEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION5× · 2020–2024 · $600k · revenue +62%
- LSLONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE5× · 2020–2024 · $535k · revenue +103%
Funded once
- SSSinirli Sorumlu Filmmor Kadin Cevre Kultur Ve Isletme Kooperatifione grant, 2020 · $100k
- RIRecidiviz Incone grant, 2022 · $100k
PARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXASgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $75k · revenue +89%
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.
Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Wildearth guardians works to protect and restore the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the american west.
The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.
To broaden the nature of a liberal arts education; teach critical thinking about social & environmental issues; foster understanding of & respect for natural & human communities; & cultivate a sense of place that encourages personal,…
Washington wild protects and restores wild lands and waters in washington state through advocacy, education and civic engagement.
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.
See Schedule OTDS fights for the end of mass incarceration and excessive punishment in Texas through direct representation, policy reform, and public education. TDS stands up for the dignity and humanity of people harmed by mass…
Progress Texas is a non-profit media organization advocating for progressive ideals and policies in our state.
Building leaders to protect the west's land, air, and water.
Glasstire is a website about visual art in Texas. Our mission is to expand the conversation about visual art in Texas.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Conservation Colorado Education Fund and the most unlike its peers is Recidiviz Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 26 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
38 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. 38 of the 59 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
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 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ↗
- Who funds TEXAS PUBLIC POLICY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LONE STAR JUSTICE ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Western Resource Advocates ↗
- Who funds Southern Methodist University ↗
- Who funds COLORADO FOURTEENERS INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION COLORADO EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds RECIDIVIZ INC ↗
- Who funds PROTECT OUR WINTERS ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds MONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Texas Appleseed ↗
- Who funds Texas Campaign for the Environment Fund ↗
- Who funds BURIED ALIVE PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Girls Embracing Mothers Inc ↗
- Who funds THE MIDDLE EAST INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds GLACIER NATIONAL PARK CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds PARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXAS ↗
- Who funds Greenspace Dallas ↗
- Who funds RESEARCH INSTITUTE ON TURKEY INC ↗
- Who funds RECIDIVIZ INC ↗
- Who funds THE WILDERNESS LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds CAFE MOMENTUM ↗
- Who funds Georgia Center for Opportunity Inc ↗
- Who funds SOUTHWEST ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT ↗
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 · The Dallas Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Texas Women's Foundation · Community Foundation Boulder County · Patagoniaorg · The Seminar Network Inc · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · National Forest Foundation · Tides 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 Chrest Foundation Inc 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Chrest Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Chrest Foundation Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.