Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Gillson Longenbaugh Foundation

Its FY2021 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$12M
Granted FY2021
1
Grants FY2021
1
States reached
$12M
Largest
01What you fund
0198% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172021.

Health$49MEducation$265kCrime & Legal$122kYouth Development$61kHuman Services$60kPublic Benefit$50kHousing & Shelter$5kOther$0
02FY2021 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$11,985,897
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Vanguard Charitable Endowment$11,985,897
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:

Your human-services grants (FY19–19, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%Wig Out: $5k → 16%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.

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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$48M · 16 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +73% since the first grant, against +26% for the ones you funded once.

16 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2021, 15 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
15

Total granted

$48M
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+73%
+26%

Still filing today

56%
47%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21
HealthEducationHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentCrime & LegalHousing & ShelterOther

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

  • UO
    University of Michigan
    2× · 2018–2019 · $400k · revenue +195% · 93% of their budget
  • TC
    Texas Children's Hospital
    2× · 2017–2019 · $288k · revenue +78%
  • CS
    Crime Stoppers of Houston Inc
    2× · 2018–2020 · $122k · revenue +73%

Funded once

  • RC
    Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jer
    one grant, 2018 · $250k
  • BC
    Baylor College of Medicinegraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $207k · revenue +47%
  • TF
    TIRR Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $165k · revenue +69%

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
The University of TexasTexas a&M Investment Management Company

To generate superior long-term investment returns to support The University of Texas and Texas A&M University systems as they provide world-class teaching, push the boundaries of discovery, and achieve excellence in patient healthcare for…

Education
2
TMC3 Development Corporation
Health
3
Banner -University Medical Group

Assist banner health complete its mission to make health care easier so life can be better by providing integrated & coordinated care & population health management.

Health
4
Texas Children's Urgent Care

To create a healthier future for children and women throughout our global community by leading in patient care, education and research.

Health
5
Children's Hospital Corporation

Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service

Health
6
Mhs Physicians of Texas

Memorial hermann health system is a nonprofit, values-driven, community-owned health system dedicated to improving health. our vision is to create healthier communities, now and for generations to come. our values are community,…

Health
7
Texas Children's Hospital Foundation

To create a healthier future for children and women throughout our global community by leading in patient care, education and research.

Health
8
University Hospital & Clinics Inc

The organization provides medical care to improve, maintain, and restore the health of the people in the communities we serve.

Health
9
Cook Children's Medical Center

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.

Health
10
Texas Children's Health Plan

To create a healthier future for children and women throughout our global community by leading in patient care, education, and research.

Health
11
Texas Health Resources

Through its affiliates, thr operates an integrated healthcare system with services and facilities throughout north central texas to improve the health of the people in the communities they serve.

Health
12
Texas Heart Medical Group

To provide cutting-edge cardiac care to diagnose, treat, and prevent cardiovascular diseases.

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Texas Children's Hospital and the most unlike its peers is University of Michigan. 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

16 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. 16 of the 31 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
11/16
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Vanguard Charitable Endowment — $41,672,046 · OtherVanguard Charitable EndowmentVanguard Charitable Endowment Progr — $4,400,000 · OtherVanguard Charitable Endowment Progr+17 more — $2,132,425 · OtherTexas Children's Hospital — $287,500 · HealthTHE METHODIST HOSPITAL FOUNDATION — $200,000 · HealthTIRR Foundation — $165,000 · HealthTEXAS MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION — $50,000 · Health+1 more — $10,000 · HealthBaylor College of Medicine — $207,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO FOUNDATION INC — $45,000 · EducationThe Brookwood Community Inc — $20,000 · EducationCamp For All Foundation — $23,500 · Youth DevelopmentDO THE WRITE THING — $7,500 · Crime & LegalWig Out — $5,000 · Human ServicesSTAR OF HOPE MISSION — $5,000 · Housing & Shelter
Other$48,204,471Health$712,500Education$272,000Youth Development$23,500Crime & Legal$7,500Human Services$5,000Housing & Shelter$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetUniversity of Michigan — $400,000 over 2y, 93% of budgetTexas Children's Hospital — $287,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBaylor College of Medicine — $207,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE METHODIST HOSPITAL FOUNDATION — $200,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTIRR Foundation — $165,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetCrime Stoppers of Houston Inc — $121,500 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetCASA DE ESPERANZA DE LOS NINOS INC — $60,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetTEXAS MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION — $50,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetTHE ARC OF THE CAPITAL AREA — $40,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetCamp For All Foundation — $23,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTEXAS MEDICAL CENTER — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDO THE WRITE THING — $7,500 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetSTAR OF HOPE MISSION — $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds University of Michigan
  • Who funds Texas Children's Hospital
  • Who funds Baylor College of Medicine
  • Who funds THE METHODIST HOSPITAL FOUNDATION
  • Who funds TIRR Foundation
  • Who funds Crime Stoppers of Houston Inc
  • Who funds CASA DE ESPERANZA DE LOS NINOS INC
  • Who funds TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds THE ARC OF THE CAPITAL AREA
  • Who funds Camp For All Foundation
  • Who funds The Brookwood Community Inc
  • Who funds TEXAS MEDICAL CENTER
  • Who funds DO THE WRITE THING
  • Who funds Wig Out
  • Who funds STAR OF HOPE MISSION

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.

Greater Houston Community FoundationTX14.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Greater Houston Community Foundation · Strake Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn 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 Gillson Longenbaugh 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 31 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph