· Private foundation
Hamon Charitable Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
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.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k18 grants · $210k
- $50k–250k11 grants · $1.1M
- $250k+7 grants · $9.4M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CHILDRENS MEDICAL CENTER | $5,000,000 |
| UPLIFT EDUCATION | $1,750,000 |
| UT SOUTHWESTERN - RED BIRD PROJECT | $1,000,000 |
| SOUTHERN METHODIST UNIVERSITY | $620,000 |
| BAYLOR UNIVERSITY | $500,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $250,000 |
| UT SOUTHWESTERN - DR BEUTLER | $250,000 |
| KIPP TEXAS | $200,000 |
| FOR OAK CLIFF | $125,000 |
| WESLEY-RANKIN COMMUNITY CENTER | $120,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $100,000 |
| VNA MEALS ON WHEELS | $100,000 |
| DALLAS COLLEGE FUND | $100,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER TEXAS | $100,000 |
| COMMUNITES IN SCHOOLS | $76,900 |
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, $3.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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.
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 +23% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.
56 repeat relationships — 30 still active in FY2024, 26 since wound down; 6 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, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $422k 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
- UEUPLIFT EDUCATION3× · 2022–2024 · $4.0M · revenue +14%
Southern Methodist University8× · 2017–2024 · $4.0M · revenue +57%
BAYLOR UNIVERSITY4× · 2021–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +15%
Funded once
- USUT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTERone grant, 2017 · $6.0M
- CMCHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $3.0M · revenue +422%
- BFBONTON FARMSone grant, 2022 · $1.3M
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.
RAISE Texas advances equitable policies and programs that foster financial security and economic mobility for low- and moderate-income Texans. We equip, innovate and advocate to reduce disparities, remove barriers and build opportunities…
As a christian university, we provide education and research opportunities preparing global leaders to partner with local communities.
At the Every Texan, we believe in a Texas that offers everyone the chance to compete and succeed in life. We envision a Texas where everyone is healthy, well educated, and financially secure. We want the best Texas, a proud state that sets…
Downtown Dallas, Inc. (DDI), is the champion of a clean and safe Downtown and of the economic development and vibrancy of this community of diverse, unique neighborhoods. DDI: Mobilizes and amplifies the services of public agencies.…
Our mission is that by 2040, at least half of all 25 to 34 year old residents of Dallas County, irrespective of race, will earn a living wage. Together, we cultivate a collaborative educational ecosystem with school systems, higher…
The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.
Leadership austin connects and develops leaders to courageously engage and transform our communities.
The mission of Dallas Services is to enable individuals with disabilities and other special needs to achieve their potential by fostering community inclusiveness and independence.
The dcms foundation's mission is to improve the quality and distribution of health services throughout dallas county.
Progress Texas is a non-profit media organization advocating for progressive ideals and policies in our state.
The foundation's mission is to strengthen and support faith communities by partnering wise investments with purposeful giving.
The mission of the Dallas-Fort Worth Hospital Council is to drive evidence-based improvement in patient care and health equity throughout the region.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dallas Children's Advocacy Center and the most unlike its peers is Meals On Wheels. 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 36 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 18% 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.
55 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. 55 of the 96 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 UPLIFT EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds Southern Methodist University ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BAYLOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds KIPP DALLAS-FORT WORTH INC ↗
- Who funds KIPP Texas Inc ↗
- Who funds THE GEORGE AND BARBARA BUSH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH DALLAS SHARED MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds MOMMIES IN NEED ↗
- Who funds CHILD POVERTY ACTION LAB ↗
- Who funds FOREFRONT LIVING FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Trinity Park Conservancy ↗
- Who funds AT LAST ↗
- Who funds FAMILY GATEWAY INC ↗
- Who funds FOR OAK CLIFF ↗
- Who funds MY POSSIBILITIES ↗
- Who funds VOGEL ALCOVE ↗
- Who funds WESLEY-RANKIN COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds BIG THOUGHT ↗
- Who funds Texas 2036 ↗
- Who funds Dallas Holocaust and Human Rights Museum ↗
- Who funds Goodwill Industries of Dallas 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 tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · The Dallas Foundation · W P & Bulah Luse Foundation · The Rees-Jones Foundation · Hillcrest Foundation · The Perot Foundation · Texas Women's Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · Theodore and Beulah Beasley Foundation Inc · Byrne Family Foundation Trust · United Way of Metropolitan Dallas Inc · The Moody 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 Hamon Charitable 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Hamon Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Hamon Charitable Foundation 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.