· Private foundation
Ennar Foundation
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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
100% of Ennar Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2018, the last year Ennar Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 10 organizations, $9k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DRESS FOR SUCCESS AUSTIN | $2,000 |
| THE CONTEMPORARY AUSTIN | $1,750 |
| THE MCNAY ART MUSEUM | $700 |
| CARITAS OF AUSTIN | $600 |
| MEALS ON WHEELS OF CENTRAL TEXAS | $600 |
| CENTRAL TEXAS FOOD BANK | $600 |
| MOBILE LOAVES & FISHES INC | $600 |
| NAMI AUSTIN | $500 |
| PLANNED LIVING ASSISTANCE NETWORK OF CENTRAL TEXAS | $500 |
| THE SAFE ALLIANCE | $500 |
| THE CIBOLO FOUNDATION | $350 |
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 95% 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.
3 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2018, 1 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (too recent to call). Read against FY2018, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2020, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $750 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
- BCBaylor College of Medicine2× · 2019–2020 · $22k · revenue +47%
- PLPlanned Living Assistance Network of Central Texas Inc2× · 2017–2018 · $2k · revenue +9%
- TCTHE CIBOLO FOUNDATION2× · 2017–2018 · $700
Funded once
- SOSOUND OFFgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +266%
- DFDRESS FOR SUCCESS AUSTINgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $2k · revenue +180%
- TCTHE CONTEMPORARY AUSTIN MUSEUM INCone grant, 2018 · $2k · revenue -28%
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.
Good Work Austin's mission is to foster healthy careers in the local food and beverage industry through professional development and advocacy for more equitable practices.
Leadership austin connects and develops leaders to courageously engage and transform our communities.
Community information now (cinow) provides data, tools, analysis, and training to inform decisions to improve texas communities. cinow's vision is improved lives and decreased disparities through democratized data.
Established in 1934, vna helps older adults live with dignity and independence at home by providing in-home care, food and friendship for the ill, hungry, and homebound.
To lead a unified effort for a hunger-free texas.
To provide services which focus on nourishing lives, enabling independence and caring for the most frail and isolated residents in the greater san antonio region.
Glasstire is a website about visual art in Texas. Our mission is to expand the conversation about visual art in Texas.
The mission of austin street center is to provide emergency shelter and related services to the homeless. programs provide crisis intervention, substance abuse awareness information and opportunities to improve present life situations to…
The ACLU of Texas works with communities, at the State Capitol, and in the courts to protect and advance civil rights and civil liberties for every Texan, no exceptions.
ConnectAbility's mission is to empower those with life altering disabilities and their caregivers to reach their fullest potential.
Provides short term shelter, housing and other services for the homeless and those at risk of becoming homeless in bexar county.
See Schedule OFort Bend Seniors Meals on Wheels provides comprehensive services, including Meals on Wheels, congregate meals, transportation, case management, health screenings, information and referral services, recreation, and more. Our…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mobile Loaves & Fishes Inc and the most unlike its peers is Planned Living Assistance Network of Central Texas Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
13 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. 13 of the 16 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 FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
- Who funds Baylor College of Medicine ↗
- Who funds SOUND OFF ↗
- Who funds DRESS FOR SUCCESS AUSTIN ↗
- Who funds THE CONTEMPORARY AUSTIN MUSEUM INC ↗
- Who funds Planned Living Assistance Network of Central Texas Inc ↗
- Who funds MCNAY ART MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS AND MORE INC ↗
- Who funds Central Texas Food Bank Inc ↗
- Who funds MOBILE LOAVES & FISHES INC ↗
- Who funds CARITAS OF AUSTIN ↗
- Who funds NAMI Central Texas ↗
- Who funds THE SAFE ALLIANCE ↗
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: Austin Community Foundation Inc · The Moody Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · 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 Ennar 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.