Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Foundation 43

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.

$266k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$80k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20212024.

Health$738kPhilanthropy$65kHuman Services$4kInternational$1k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $70k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $196k
$55,500
Median grant
4
States reached
$195k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE TREVOR PROJECT$80,483
HEADSTRONG PROJECT INC$60,000
ACTIVE MINDS INC$55,500
BLACK MEN HEAL$35,000
SOCIAL GOOD FUND$35,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY21–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 74% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BLACK MEN HEAL: $45k → 10%SOCIAL GOOD FUND: $35k → 9%THE TREVOR PROJECT: $80k → 14%HEADSTRONG PROJECT INC: $60k → 17%YWCA OF GREATER AUSTIN: $1k → 10%ASIAN MENTAL HEALTH COLLECTIVE INC: $5k → 14%ACTIVE MINDS INC: $56k → 14%OPERATION BREAKTHROUGH INC: $1k → 15%THE TRAVIS MILLS FOUNDATION: $3k → 12%BLACK MEN HEAL: $40k → 10%SOCIAL GOOD FUND: $25k → 9%THE TREVOR PROJECT: $64k → 14%HEADSTRONG PROJECT INC: $50k → 17%ACTIVE MINDS INC: $50k → 14%BLACK MEN HEAL: $35k → 10%SOCIAL GOOD FUND: $5k → 9%THE TREVOR PROJECT: $63k → 14%HEADSTRONG PROJECT INC: $46k → 17%ACTIVE MINDS INC: $40k → 14%BLACK MEN HEAL: $20k → 10%THE TREVOR PROJECT INC: $38k → 14%HEAD STRONG PROJECT INC: $20k → 17%ACTIVE MINDS INC: $25k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 22% of Foundation 43’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, 1% of the giving stays in TX; read by stated purpose it is 14% — more of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Foundation 43lessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$733k · 4 repeat orgs$10k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +64% since the first grant, against -23% for the ones you funded once.

4 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
4

Total granted

$733k
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+64%
-23%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
HealthCivil RightsEducationPublic BenefitOther

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

  • TREVOR PROJECT INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $246k · revenue +64%
  • HS
    HEAD STRONG PROJECT INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $176k · revenue +26%
  • AM
    Active Minds Inc
    4× · 2021–2024 · $171k · revenue +64%

Funded once

  • AM
    Asian Mental Health Collective Inc
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -39%
  • TRAVIS MILLS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue -23%
  • OB
    OPERATION BREAKTHROUGH INC
    one grant, 2021 · $1k · revenue +3%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Black Mental Health & Wellness
Health
2
Frontline Strong

Therapy services for frontline workers such as military, police officers and fire fighters. Free mental heath services.

3
Our Mental Health Collective

Our Mental Health Collective provides culturally responsive and affirming mental health care resources for BIPOC mental health providers and community members.

Health
4
Safe Space Organization

Safe Space Organization is a community safe space that strives to change the conversation around mental health by educating, connecting and supporting others through a peer-to-peer network. Safe Space is a community hub with therapeutic…

Health
5
Black Los Angeles County Client Coalition Inc

Mental health services advocacy

Human Services
6
All Secure Foundation Inc

Veteran suicide numbers are on the rise and even more warrior and warrior families are suffering in silence. But there is help and there is hope. All Secure Foundation retrains your brain from Post Traumatic Stress PTS to Post Traumatic…

Human Services
7
Flourish Therapy Inc

We are committed to providing affordable, culturally competent mental health care to LGBTQ individuals and their families. We educate therapists in culturally competent practice combined with evidence-based therapy. Flourish values its…

Health
8
Pacific Center for Human Growth

Provides culturally responsive therapy, peer to peer support groups, community outreach services, and facilitated workshops in Alameda County with the aim to enhance the mental health and overall well-being of the LGBTQIA+ and QTBIPOC…

9
Inseparable Inc

Inseparable Inc is focused on creating a world where mental health is treated as a critical and equal piece of overall health, and where systems are designed with their impact on mental health in mind. Inseparable, Inc. is a growing…

Health
10
La Maida Project

La Maida Project (LMP) is a nonprofit organization addressing the growing mental health crisis by empowering organizations to adopt an ecological approach to healing that improves the mental health of their teams and those they serve.

Health
11
Trusolace Counseling & Wellness Center
Health
12
Milife

Mental health

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Black Men Heal and the most unlike its peers is Asian Mental Health Collective Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

9 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

HEAD STRONG PROJECT INC — $175,560 · HealthHEAD STRONG PROJECT INCActive Minds Inc — $170,828 · HealthActive Minds IncBLACK MEN HEAL — $140,328 · HealthBLACK MEN HEAL+1 more — $5,000 · HealthTREVOR PROJECT INC — $245,904 · Civil RightsTREVOR PROJECT INCSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC — $65,000 · EducationSOCIAL GO…+1 more — $1,000 · EducationTRAVIS MILLS FOUNDATION — $2,500 · Public BenefitYoung Women's Christian Association of Greater Austin — $1,000 · Other
Health$491,716Civil Rights$245,904Education$66,000Public Benefit$2,500Other$1,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTREVOR PROJECT INC — $245,904 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHEAD STRONG PROJECT INC — $175,560 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetActive Minds Inc — $170,828 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetBLACK MEN HEAL — $140,328 over 4y, 7.2% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC — $65,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetAsian Mental Health Collective Inc — $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTRAVIS MILLS FOUNDATION — $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOPERATION BREAKTHROUGH INC — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYoung Women's Christian Association of Greater Austin — $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

Paypal Charitable Giving FundDC10.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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 Foundation 43 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 9 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph