Skip to content
Gordon & Patricia Johnson Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Gordon & Patricia Johnson Foundation Inc

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.

$41k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Education$81kHousing & Shelter$43kHealth$35kCrime & Legal$29kScience & Tech$23kPhilanthropy$15kAnimals$14kArts & Culture$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k5 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $25k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$670k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HELPING HAND HOME$15,300
NONPAREIL INSTITUTES$10,000
ST JUDE RESEARCH HOSPITAL$5,000
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION$5,000
CASA OF TRAVIS COUNTY$2,500
OPEN DOOR PRESCHOOL$2,500
ALLISON BAKER ENDOWED SCHOLARSHIP -UT$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 (FY17–24, $34k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 26% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%NON PAREIL INSTITUTE: $15k → 5%NON PAREIL INSTITUTE: $10k → 5%OPEN DOOR PRESCHOOL: $2k → 10%OPEN DOOR PRESCHOOL: $1k → 10%OPEN DOOR PRESCHOOL: $4k → 10%OPEN DOOR PRESCHOOL: $3k → 10%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.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 12% of Gordon & Patricia Johnson Foundation Inc’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 86% of the giving stays in TX; by stated purpose, 82%.

Gordon & Patricia Johnson Foundation Inclessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 3.6% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$170k · 9 repeat orgs$64k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
6

Total granted

$170k
$59k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+53%
+122%

Still filing today

67%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesEducationAnimalsCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • NI
    NONPAREIL INSTITUTE
    2× · 2017–2018 · $25k · revenue +61%
  • CA
    COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF TRAVIS COUNTY
    6× · 2018–2024 · $24k · revenue +38%
  • EI
    EMANCIPET INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $14k · revenue +114%

Funded once

  • SS
    ST STEPHENS EPISCOPAL SCHOOL
    one grant, 2017 · $40k
  • TA
    THE AUSTIN 20
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • TS
    THE SAFE ALLIANCEgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +66%
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
The Common Application Inc

The common application is a not-for-profit membership organization of over 1,100 colleges and universities across the globe committed to access, equity, and integrity in the college admission process. every year, over 1.5 million students…

Education
2
Uatx

Uatx is a nonprofit dedicated to building a liberal arts university committed to freedom of inquiry, freedom of conscience, and civil discourse. to maintain these principles, the university will be fiercely independent financially,…

Education
3
Texas Apartment Association Education Foundation

Educates texans about career opportunities in the rental housing industry and works with our local apartment association and workforce development partners to support training programs for those new to the industry.

Education
4
Silicon Schools Fund Inc

The mission of the silicon schools fund is to improve education through supporting the launch of excellent new schools, improving academic instruction in existing schools, and by funding some of the boldest innovations in education…

Education
5
American Physical Therapy Association

Building a community that advances the profession of physical therapy to improve the health of society.

Health
6
Dunwoody College of Technology

Dunwoody college changes lives by building opportunities for graduates to have successful careers, to develop into leaders and entrepreneurs, and to engage in "the better performance of life's duties." quote is from the last will and…

Education
7
American Press Institute Inc

American press institute acts as a scout on the frontier of technology and audience behavior to identify where change is occurring and helps news organizations learn how to implement and scale that change successfully so they have a…

Arts & Culture
8
San Antonio Area Foundation

To serve as your most trusted and impactful philanthropic partner.

Philanthropy
9
University of Virginia Foundation

To provide administrative services to university of virginia (university) entities, university associated organizations, or other entities involved in activities which support the university. to engage in matters pertaining to real…

Education
10
Leadership Austin

Leadership austin connects and develops leaders to courageously engage and transform our communities.

Youth Development
11
National Association for College Admission Counseling

Empowering college admission counseling professionals through education, advocacy, and community.

Education
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Svp Austin Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Society for the Preservation of Greek Housing. 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

10 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 18 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
8/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ST STEPHENS EPISCOPAL SCHOOL: $40,000 · OtherST STEPHENS EPISCOPAL SCHOOLHELPING HAND HOME: $34,800 · OtherHELPING HAND HOMECOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF TRAVIS COUNTY: $24,000 · OtherCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF TRAVIS COUNTYNONPAREIL INSTITUTES: $22,500 · OtherNONPAREIL INSTITUTESST JUDE RESEARCH HOSPITAL: $10,000 · OtherST JUDE RESEARCH HOSPITALTHE SOCIETY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF GREEK HOUSING: $10,000 · OtherTHE SOCIETY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF GREEK HOUSING+5 more: $16,500 · Other+5 moreNONPAREIL INSTITUTE: $25,000 · Human ServicesNONPAREIL INSTI…OPEN DOOR PRESCHOOL: $9,000 · Human ServicesOPEN DOOR PRESC…KAPPA KAPPA GAMMA FOUNDATION: $21,000 · EducationKAPPA KAPPA…UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY …AUSTIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 · PhilanthropyEMANCIPET INC: $13,583 · AnimalsSVP AUSTIN INC: $2,500 · Community Improvement
Other$157,800Human Services$34,000Education$26,000Philanthropy$15,000Animals$13,583Community Improvement$2,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNONPAREIL INSTITUTE: $25,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF TRAVIS COUNTY: $24,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetKAPPA KAPPA GAMMA FOUNDATION: $21,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetAUSTIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetEMANCIPET INC: $13,583 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE SOCIETY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF GREEK HOUSING: $10,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetOPEN DOOR PRESCHOOL: $9,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE SAFE ALLIANCE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSVP AUSTIN INC: $2,500 over 1y, 1.9% 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.

  • Who funds NONPAREIL INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF TRAVIS COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds KAPPA KAPPA GAMMA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds AUSTIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds EMANCIPET INC ↗
  • Who funds THE SOCIETY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF GREEK HOUSING ↗
  • Who funds OPEN DOOR PRESCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds THE SAFE ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SVP AUSTIN INC ↗

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.

Austin Community Foun…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Austin Community Foundation IncTX15.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Austin Community Foundation Inc · 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 Gordon & Patricia Johnson Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Gordon & Patricia Johnson Foundation Inc. 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%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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.

    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 18 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Gordon & Patricia Johnson’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