· Private foundation
Gertrude & Edward Swartz Charitable Tr
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
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RICE UNIVERSITY | $5,000 |
| MORE TO LIFE | $5,000 |
| ALCU FOUNDATION | $4,000 |
| HOUSTON AREA WOMEN'S CENTER | $4,000 |
| NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA | $3,500 |
| MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER | $3,500 |
| EARTHJUSTICE | $3,000 |
| NORTHWEST HARVEST | $3,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION | $3,000 |
| COMMUNITY FOOD BANK OF SOUTHERN AZ | $3,000 |
| HUMANE BORDERS | $3,000 |
| COVID 19 LONGHAULER ADVOCACY PROJECT | $3,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $3,000 |
| CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY | $2,500 |
| NATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL | $2,500 |
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 (FY17–25, $53k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +49% since the first grant, against -5% for the ones you funded once.
29 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- HAHouston Area Women's Center9× · 2017–2025 · $32k · revenue +110%
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC9× · 2017–2025 · $28k · revenue +12%
EARTHJUSTICE9× · 2017–2025 · $25k · revenue +82%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $1k
OXFAM-AMERICA INCone grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue -5%
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.
Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.
We exist to end the abuse of animals raised for food. this mission is executed by persuading companies and institutions to adopt animal welfare policies through negotiation and pressure campaigns, and then holding them accountable to their…
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
The federation for american immigration reform's (fair) mission is to educate the public about the economic, sociological, environmental, demographic and other effects of mass immigration to the united states.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Planned Parenthood Federation of America Inc and the most unlike its peers is Theatre Under the Stars Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 51 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
23 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. 23 of the 33 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 Houston Area Women's Center ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST HARVEST EMM ↗
- Who funds Community Food Bank Inc ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD ARIZONA INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds The Houston Food Bank ↗
- Who funds Theatre Under the Stars Inc ↗
- Who funds UNITED NEGRO COLLEGE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Trinity University ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds COVID-19 LONGHAULER ADVOCACY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC ↗
- Who funds HUMANE BORDERS INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds TUCSON CENTERS FOR WOMEN & CHILDREN INC DBA EMERGE CENTER AGAINST DOMESTIC ABUSE ↗
- Who funds THE JEWISH FEDERATIONS OF NORTH AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds OXFAM-AMERICA 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: 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 Gertrude & Edward Swartz Charitable Tr 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.
- Oxfam-America Inc — 0% 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.