· Private foundation
Harry S Moss Heart Trust
Its FY2025 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 FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $320k
- $250k+8 grants · $3.2M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER | $750,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION | $590,100 |
| TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES FOUNDATION | $500,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION | $300,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION | $275,000 |
| SOUTHWEST TRANSPLANT ALLIANCE INC | $250,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS FOUNDATION | $250,000 |
| AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION INC | $250,000 |
| UNTHSC FOUNDATION | $120,000 |
| TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| BROTHER BILL'S HELPING HAND | $10,000 |
| LIVING FOR ZACHARY | $7,500 |
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 (FY23–23, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, 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 +35% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k 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
- AHAmerican Heart Association Inc5× · 2020–2025 · $2.5M · revenue +53%
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INC3× · 2023–2025 · $2.2M · revenue +28%- THTexas Health Resources Foundation4× · 2020–2025 · $1.8M · revenue +73%
Funded once
- MHMETHODIST HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATIONone grant, 2020 · $250k
- BHBLACK HEART ASSOCIATIONgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $155k · revenue +100% · 31% of their budget
- CMCHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $150k · revenue +428%
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.
To improve the care and well being of our community, nationally and internationally, through innovative clinically relevant research that is consistent with the mission, vision and values of Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH).
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
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.
To create an integrated hospital system operating in the dallas area to improve the health of the people in the communities it serves without regard to their ability to pay.
To foster and support the activities and purposes of Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH), to encourage broad-based public support of the healthcare system and its affiliated institutions, and to advance the medical objectives, including…
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
To provide cutting-edge cardiac care to diagnose, treat, and prevent cardiovascular diseases.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Texas Health Resources Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Breakthrough T1D. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
18 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. 18 of the 24 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 American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Texas Health Resources Foundation ↗
- Who funds Baylor Health Care System Foundation ↗
- Who funds SOUTHWEST TRANSPLANT ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds Dallas Methodist Hospitals Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PARKLAND FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UNTHSC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BLACK HEART ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BREAKTHROUGH T1D ↗
- Who funds Baylor College of Medicine ↗
- Who funds Texas Heart Institute ↗
- Who funds ARLINGTON-MANSFIELD AREA YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds BROTHER BILLS HELPING HAND ↗
- Who funds Living for Zachary ↗
- Who funds TEXAS BALLET THEATER 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: Fichtenbaum Charitable Trust · Hillcrest Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation 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 Harry S Moss Heart Trust 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.