· Public charity
Fwdus Inc
Fwd.us, inc.
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.
The 23 grants below total $558,500 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $589,500 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $31,000 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $14k
- $10k–50k19 grants · $435k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $110k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| HOUSE MAJORITY FORWARD | $60,000 |
| TEXAS RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION | $50,000 |
| TEXAS NURSERY & LANDSCAPE ASSOCIATION | $40,000 |
| CHURCH WORLD SERVICE INC | $40,000 |
| TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESS | $35,000 |
| TEXAS BUSINESS LEADERSHIP COUNCIL | $30,000 |
| NORTH TEXAS COMMISSION | $30,000 |
| CENTER FOR COMMUNITY ALTERNATIVES INC | $25,000 |
| NATIONAL REDISTRICTING ACTION FUND | $25,000 |
| MOMSRISING TOGETHER | $25,000 |
| DEFENDING DEMOCRACY TOGETHER INSTITUTE | $25,000 |
| COLLECTIVE FUTURE | $25,000 |
| GREATER HOUSTON PARTNERSHIP | $20,000 |
| STATE POLICY INSTITUTE | $20,000 |
| KAIROS DEMOCRACY FUND | $20,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $2.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 78% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +44% since the first grant, against +19% for the ones you funded once.
47 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2024, 37 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 57% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $242k 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
- CFCOALITION FOR THE AMERICAN DREAM INC5× · 2019–2023 · $1.1M · revenue +179% · 74% of their budget
- TATIDES ADVOCACY3× · 2019–2022 · $1.0M · revenue +75%
- EMEMPOWER MISSISSIPPI5× · 2019–2023 · $776k · revenue +92% · 59% of their budget
Funded once
- YOYES ON PROP 57one grant, 2017 · $1.0M
- OFOKLAHOMANS FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE REFORM INCone grant, 2017 · $700k
- AFARIZONANS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND REHABILITATIONone grant, 2020 · $500k
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.
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.
The forum advocates for the value of immigrants and immigration to the nation. from a diversity of perspectives, the forum uses communication, advocacy and policy to create a vision, concensus and strategy to lead to a better, more…
The nonpartisan campaign legal center advances democracy through law at the federal, state and local levels, fighting for every american's rights to responsive government and a fair opportunity to participate in and affect the democratic…
Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…
Legal, immigration and community organizing
New american leaders action fund (nalaf) is building a democracy that represents and includes all people by engaging new voters, supporting new americans as they run for office, and expanding civic engagement.
Our mission is to advance the field of public affairs and provide tools and resources that enable public affairs executives and managers to achieve their business and professional goals.
Represent members and cal employers to members of cal legislature and other agencies of state government through in-house legislative analysts, lobbying staff, and contract lobbyists. cal chamber publishes books and software related to…
The ACLU Foundation of Texas is the unyielding guardian and promoter of freedom, justice, equality and dignity of all people, particularly for those who are still fighting to secure the full exercise of their civil rights and liberties.…
The american civil liberties union of northern california (aclu nc union) defends and advances the principles of freedom, equality and justice contained in the united states constitution. aclu nc union, a california mutual benefit…
Providing research, education and practical information all aimed at optimizing newspapers' business operations, deepening their community engagement and enhancing the quality of their journalism.
To focuses on public education and advocacy to generate public awareness of programs and services available to immigrants in Florida.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Voices of Community Activists & Leaders (Vocal-Ny) Inc and the most unlike its peers is North Texas Dream Team. 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 20 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
116 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. 116 of the 135 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 YES ON 805 INC ↗
- Who funds SIXTEEN THIRTY FUND ↗
- Who funds COALITION FOR THE AMERICAN DREAM INC ↗
- Who funds TIDES ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds EMPOWER MISSISSIPPI ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL IMMIGRATION FORUM ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC ↗
- Who funds Care in Action Inc ↗
- Who funds VOICES OF COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS & LEADERS (VOCAL-NY) INC ↗
- Who funds VOTERS ORGANIZED TO EDUCATE-VOTE ACTION FUND ↗
- Who funds PC ADVOCACY INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK STATE IMMIGRANT ACTION FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR COMMUNITY ALTERNATIVES INC ↗
- Who funds New York Communities For Change Inc ↗
- Who funds NEW HOUR FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN LI I ↗
- Who funds TEXAS NURSERY & LANDSCAPE ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds American Action Network Inc ↗
- Who funds NEW VENTURE FUND ↗
- Who funds PAROLE PREPARATION PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds American Business Immigration Coalition Action ↗
- Who funds HOUSE MAJORITY FORWARD ↗
- Who funds WELCOMEUS INC ↗
- Who funds CASA IN ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH TEXAS DREAM TEAM ↗
- Who funds AMERICA'S VOICE ↗
- Who funds VOTEVETS ACTION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Californians for Human Immigrant Rights Leadership Action Fund ↗
- Who funds TEXAS RESTAURANT ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds LIVING UNITED FOR CHANGE IN ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds State Business Executives ↗
- Who funds PRODIGAL CHILD PROJECT PCP ↗
- Who funds WORKERS DEFENSE ACTION FUND ↗
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: Fwdus Education Fund Inc · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Open Society Action Fund Inc · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Center for Community Change Action · Tides Advocacy · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · American Federation of State County and Municipal Employees · The Heising-Simons Action Fund · America Votes · Chan Zuckerberg Initiative Advocacy · Communications Workers of America Afl-Cio Clc
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 Fwdus Inc 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.
- Casa Inc — 8% of income from government
- Fusion Partnership Inc — 3% of income from government
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.