Skip to content
Futures Haven at a glance

· Private foundation

Futures Haven

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.

$21k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$4k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2025.

Civil Rights$23kHuman Services$7kHousing & Shelter$5kHealth$3kYouth Development$3kInternational$3kArts & Culture$2kPublic Benefit$2k
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$517k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TRANSYOUTHEQUALITY$4,000
TRANSCONTINENTAL PIPELINE$2,000
MAHOGANY PROJECT$2,000
THRIVE YOUTH$2,000
RAINBOW RAILROAD$2,000
OUTYOUTH$2,000
TEXAS HEALTH ACTION$2,000
TEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK EDUCATION FUND$1,000
LAMBDA LEGAL$1,000
EQUALITY TEXAS FOUNDATION$1,000
TENT$500
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS$500
SAVE OUR SISTERS UNITED$500
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:

Its human-services grants (FY24–25, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%TRANSCONTINENTAL PIPELINE: $5k → 12%TRANSCONTINENTAL PIPELINE: $2k → 12%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.

71%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$33k · 6 repeat orgs$14k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
2

Total granted

$33k
$2k

Still filing today

83%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
Civil RightsHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyArts & CultureOther
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

  • EE
    EQTX Equality Texas Foundation
    3× · 2023–2025 · $16k · revenue +14%
  • TC
    TRANS CONTINENTAL PIPELINE
    2× · 2024–2025 · $7k
  • TY
    THRIVE YOUTH
    2× · 2024–2025 · $4k

Funded once

  • LW
    LIFE WORKS
    one grant, 2024 · $1k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $560
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
Eqtx Equality Texas dba Equality Texas

EQTX Equality Texas dba Equality Texas works to secure full equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer Texans through political action, education, community organizing, and collaboration.

—
2
National Trans Bar Association
Education
3
Transgender Advocates Knowledgeable Empowering

Working together as a community to empower Trans People of Color by meeting needs and increasing accessibility

Human Services
4
Transgender Law Center

Transgender Law Center TLC changes law, policy and attitudes so that all people can live safely, authentically, and free from discrimination regardless of their gender identity or expression.

Civil Rights
5
National Lgbtq Task Force Action Fund Inc

National lgbtq task force action fund, founded in 1974 as the national gay and lesbian task force, inc., works to build the grassroots political power of the lgbt community to win complete equality. we do this through direct and grassroots…

—
6
Global Philanthropy Project Inc

Global Philanthropy Project (GPP or the Organization) is a collaboration of funders and philanthropic advisors working to expand global philanthropic support to advance the human rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex…

Philanthropy
7
Queer Works

Our mission is to ameliorate disparities faced by transgender, gender non-binary and intersex people as well as help reduce similar disparities among our lesbian, gay and bisexual communities.

Health
8
Outfront Minnesota

Outfront's mission is to create a state where lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer (lgbtq) people are free to be who they are, love who they love, and live without fear of violence, harassment or discrimination. in our effort to…

Civil Rights
9
Immigration Equality

Immigration equality promotes justice and equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and hiv-positive immigrants through direct legal services, policy advocacy, and impact litigation.

Civil Rights
10
Lgbt Center Intercultural Collective Inc

Colectivo Intercultural TRANSgrediendo is a social organization, which works on the empowerment of human rights, access and comprehensive health care of TransGNB people, strengthening the social and cultural expression of diverse gender…

Civil Rights
11
American Civil Liberties Union of Texas Inc

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.

—
12
Out & Equal

To provide leadership and professional development, education and research to create workplaces free from discrimination.

Social Science
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rainbow Railroad Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is Save Our Sisters United. 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

10 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 15 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EQTX Equality Texas Foundation: $16,000 · Civil RightsEQTX Equality Texas FoundationTEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK EDUCATION FUND: $1,500 · Civil RightsTEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK EDUCATION FUNDLAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND INC: $1,000 · Civil RightsLAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND INCTRANSYOUTHEQUALITY: $4,000 · OtherTRANSYOUTHEQUALITYTHRIVE YOUTH: $4,000 · OtherTHRIVE YOUTHLIFE WORKS: $1,000 · OtherLIFE WORKSIndividual grant recipient: $560 · OtherTENT: $500 · OtherSAVE OUR SISTERS UNITED: $1,000 · OtherSAVE OUR SISTERS UNITEDMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $500 · OtherTRANS CONTINENTAL PIPELINE: $7,000 · Human ServicesTRANS CONTINENTAL…Out Youth Inc: $3,000 · Youth DevelopmentRAINBOW RAILROAD USA INC: $2,000 · PhilanthropyTHE MAHOGANY PROJECT: $2,000 · Arts & CultureTEXAS HEALTH ACTION: $2,000 · Health
Civil Rights$18,500Other$11,560Human Services$7,000Youth Development$3,000Philanthropy$2,000Arts & Culture$2,000Health$2,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEQTX Equality Texas Foundation: $16,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetTRANS CONTINENTAL PIPELINE: $7,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetOut Youth Inc: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetRAINBOW RAILROAD USA INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK EDUCATION FUND: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSAVE OUR SISTERS UNITED: $1,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetLAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUCATION FUND INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Tides FoundationAustin Community Foun…The Dallas FoundationVanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Tides FoundationCA14.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Foundation · Austin Community Foundation Inc · The Dallas Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Futures Haven funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Futures Haven. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's 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
    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 · 0–5%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Futures Haven?

    Find your warmest path to Futures Haven 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.

    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 15 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Futures Haven’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