Skip to content
Coleman Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Coleman Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$242k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$121k
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, FY2021 to 2024.

Recreation & Sports$333kPhilanthropy$221kHealth$70kCrime & Legal$29kFood & Nutrition$13kEducation$9k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $217k
$96,082
Median grant
2
States reached
$5.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FIELDS FUTURES FOUNDATION$121,082
SAN ANTONIO LIVESTOCK EXPOSITION$96,082
SAN ANTONIO SPORTS FOUNDATION$25,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY21–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%CHILD ADVOCATES SAN ANTONIO: $25k → 16%FIELDS FUTURES FOUNDATION: $121k → 16%SPECIAL OLYMPICS TENNESSEE: $8k → 17%TEXAS BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $25k → 16%FIELDS FUTURES FOUNDATION: $100k → 16%SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK: $13k → 16%FIELDS & FUTURE FOUNDATION: $100k → 16%CHILD ADVOCATES SAN ANTONIO: $4k → 16%SAN ANTONIO LIVESTOCK EXPOSITION: $96k → 16%MISSION ROAD MINISTRIES: $25k → 16%MISSION ROAD MINISTRIES: $20k → 16%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.

59%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$400k · 4 repeat orgs$276k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
6

Total granted

$400k
$180k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+25%

Still filing today

75%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $96k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
Recreation & SportsCivil RightsReligionHealthOther
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

  • FF
    FIELDS FUTURES FOUNDATION
    2× · 2023–2024 · $221k
  • SA
    SAN ANTONIO SPORTS FOUNDATION
    4× · 2021–2024 · $104k · revenue +16%
  • MR
    MISSION ROAD MINISTRIES
    2× · 2022–2023 · $45k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • FF
    FIELDS & FUTURES FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue +110%
  • TB
    TEXAS BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +16%
  • HC
    HEMISFAIR CONSERVANCYgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +59%
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
Tennis Officials of San Antonio Association
Recreation & Sports
2
San Antonio Area Foundation

To serve as your most trusted and impactful philanthropic partner.

Philanthropy
3
San Antonio Medical Foundation

The mission of the san antonio medical foundation is to improvehealth care, advance biomedical science, and enhance communitywell-being by providing leadership & active stewardship of our landand other assets.

Health
4
Sa Talent Inc Sa Works

The mission of sa talent, inc. is to educate and develop youth and adults into the talent needs of san antonio's current and future employers and provide services for the regional employers for the retention and growth of their local…

Education
5
San Antonio Metropolitan Ministries Inc

Provides short term shelter, housing and other services for the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless in bexar county.

—
6
Greater Satx

The mission of greater:satx is to lead the developemnt and diversification of san antonio regional economy through the recruitment and expansion of qualify employers and job producing investments.

—
7
San Antonio Teachers Council

Represent public education employees in labor related matters, to include matters specific to wages, hours, and thier condition of employment.

—
8
San Antonio Tennis Association

Develop and promote the lifetime sport

—
9
San Antonio Foster Care and Adoption and Services

San antonio foster care and adoption services inc. is a licensed child placement agency in the state of texas. the organization cares for children placed in foster care by the state of texas.

Human Services
10
Texas Medical Association

The texas medical association (tma), the nation's largest and one of the oldest state medical societies, represents over 59,000 physicians and medical students dedicated to enhancing the health of all texans. in collaboration with 110…

—
11
San Antonio Bowl Association

Organization and administration of a post-season collegiate football bowl game

—
12
Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors' National Association

To help the advancement of the sheet metal and air conditioning industry and to foster and encourage the organization and continuing function of the regional, state, and local associations.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fields & Futures Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Texas Biomedical Research Institute. 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

9 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. 9 of the 11 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FIELDS FUTURES FOUNDATION: $221,082 · OtherFIELDS FUTURES FOUNDATIONSAN ANTONIO SPORTS FOUNDATION: $104,250 · OtherSAN ANTONIO SPORTS FOUNDATIONSAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK: $12,922 · Other+2 more: $16,578 · OtherFIELDS & FUTURES FOUNDATION: $100,000 · Recreation & SportsFIELDS & FUTURES FOUNDATIONSAN ANTONIO LIVESTOCK EXPOSITION INC: $96,082 · Recreation & SportsSAN ANTONIO LIVESTOCK EXPOSITION INCHEMISFAIR CONSERVANCY: $25,000 · Recreation & SportsHEMISFAIR CONSERVANCYMISSION ROAD MINISTRIES: $45,000 · ReligionCHILD ADVOCATES SAN ANTONIO: $29,250 · Civil RightsTEXAS BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $25,000 · Health
Other$354,832Recreation & Sports$221,082Religion$45,000Civil Rights$29,250Health$25,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSAN ANTONIO SPORTS FOUNDATION: $104,250 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetFIELDS & FUTURES FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetSAN ANTONIO LIVESTOCK EXPOSITION INC: $96,082 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMISSION ROAD MINISTRIES: $45,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetCHILD ADVOCATES SAN ANTONIO: $29,250 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTEXAS BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHEMISFAIR CONSERVANCY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetSAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK: $12,922 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS TENNESSEE INC: $8,078 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.

Circle Bar FoundationJohn R & Greli N Less…Enterprise Holdings F…The Blackbaud Giving …Charities Aid Foundat…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…American Endowment Fo…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Circle Bar FoundationTX13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Circle Bar Foundation · John R & Greli N Less Charitable Trust #FE324 · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Coleman Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Coleman Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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 11 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 Coleman’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