· Private foundation
Edward & Wilhelmina Ackerman Foundation
Its FY2025 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
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 42% of EDWARD & WILHELMINA ACKERMAN FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k35 grants · $86k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $79k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $410k
- $250k+4 grants · $4.8M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS - ACKERMAN CENTER FOR HOLOCAUST STUDIES | $1,725,000 |
| ST MARK'S SCHOOL OF TEXAS | $1,275,200 |
| HOCKADAY SCHOOL | $1,235,700 |
| DALLAS HOLOCAUST AND HUMAN RIGHTS MUSEUM | $516,000 |
| TEMPLE EMANU-EL | $210,000 |
| DALLAS URBAN DEBATE ALLIANCE | $100,000 |
| CATCH UP & READ | $100,000 |
| VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY | $26,120 |
| 18 DOORS | $25,000 |
| THE DALLAS MUSEUM OF ART | $15,000 |
| TULANE UNIVERSITY | $12,500 |
| QUEENS UNIVERSITY OF CHARLOTTE | $8,000 |
| NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK | $6,000 |
| SUPERMOON PROJECT | $5,400 |
| DUKE UNIVERSITY | $5,000 |
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 human-services grants (FY20–25, $25k) 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 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
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.
41 repeat relationships — 33 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $49k 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
- HSHOCKADAY SCHOOL9× · 2017–2025 · $2.1M · revenue +44%
- DHDallas Holocaust and Human Rights Museum5× · 2019–2025 · $573k · revenue +15%
- JSJUNE SHELTON SCHOOL AND EVALUATION CENTER5× · 2019–2023 · $253k · revenue +60%
Funded once
- UOUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLASone grant, 2017 · $150k
UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEFone grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue -21%- UWUNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN DALLAS INCone grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue -4%
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.
As a christian university, we provide education and research opportunities preparing global leaders to partner with local communities.
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…
The primary mission of furman as a liberal arts institution is to provide a distinctive education in fine arts, humanities, social sciences, mathematics and the sciences, as well as selected professional disciplines.
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.
The university of dallas is dedicated to the pursuit of wisdom, of truth, and of virtue as the proper and primary ends of education. the university seeks to educate its students so they may develop the intellectual and moral virtues,…
Trinity university is an independent co-educational university whose mission is excellence in the interrelated areas of teaching, research and services.
The mission of texas trees foundation is to improve the health of cities and people through the transformative power of trees.
New york school of interior design provides the most innovative, immersive, and transformative interior design education in the world, demonstrating the impact of professionally designed interiors on the health, happiness, and well-being…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
Fordham university, the jesuit university of new york, is committed to the discovery of wisdom and the transmission of learning, through research and through education of the highest quality. for more information, see schedule o.
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
See schedule o.drake's mission is to provide an exceptional learning environment that prepares students for meaningful personal lives, professional accomplishments, and responsible global citizenship. the drake experience is distinguished…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Communities Foundation of Texas Inc and the most unlike its peers is Great Investors Best Ideas Foundation. 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 40 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
58 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. 58 of the 85 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 ST MARK'S SCHOOL OF TEXAS ↗
- Who funds HOCKADAY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds Dallas Holocaust and Human Rights Museum ↗
- Who funds DALLAS URBAN DEBATE ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds JUNE SHELTON SCHOOL AND EVALUATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds CATCH UP & READ INC ↗
- Who funds LUMIN EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds Dallas Museum of Art ↗
- Who funds INTERFAITHFAMILYCOM INC ↗
- Who funds Queens University of Charlotte ↗
- Who funds THE EPISCOPAL SCHOOL OF DALLAS INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds Vanderbilt University ↗
- Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds GREAT INVESTORS BEST IDEAS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PRESTON HOLLOW PRESBYTERIAN SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds DUBLIN SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds THE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF METROPOLITAN DALLAS INC ↗
- Who funds RANDOLPH-MACON COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds THE LAMPLIGHTER SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds THE MENNINGER CLINIC ↗
- Who funds CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES COMMUNITY PARTNERS INC ↗
- Who funds FRACTURED ATLAS INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH TEXAS PUBLIC BROADCASTING INC ↗
- Who funds JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE OF DALLAS INC DBA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE ↗
- Who funds The Family Place ↗
- Who funds WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds IN MY SHOES INC ↗
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: Texas Instruments Foundation · The Dallas Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Hillcrest Foundation · Mb and Edna Zale Foundation · The Rees-Jones Foundation · The Eugene McDermott Foundation · The Addy Foundation · W P & Bulah Luse Foundation · Morton H Meyerson Family Foundation · Fidelity Foundation · Dallas Jewish Community 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 Edward & Wilhelmina Ackerman Foundation 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 Edward & Wilhelmina Ackerman Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Edward & Wilhelmina Ackerman Foundation 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.