Skip to content
Hartnett Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Hartnett Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$70k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$30k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0182% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Food & Nutrition$85kHuman Services$26kCivil Rights$10kAnimals$3kEducation$1kArts & Culture$100International$100Health$25Other$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$569k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Grace$30,000
MetroPort Meals on Wheels$20,000
Tarrant County Food Bank$20,000
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 (FY22–23, $13k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%The Family Place: $10k → 14%Center for Transforming Lives: $3k → 11%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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$180k · 3 repeat orgs$61k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +19% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
15

Total granted

$180k
$41k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
+7%

Still filing today

67%
73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsCivil RightsHuman ServicesHealthEducationOther
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

  • G
    GRACE
    5× · 2021–2025 · $115k
  • MM
    METROPORT MEALS ON WHEELS INC
    4× · 2021–2025 · $55k · revenue +19%
  • AF
    ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $10k · revenue -29%

Funded once

  • CC
    CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY STOREHOUSE INC
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +5%
  • TF
    The Family Place
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +7%
  • TA
    Tarrant Area Food Bank
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +9%
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
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Milam County
—
2
Ft Bend County Child Advocates Inc

Fort Bend County Child Advocates, Inc. provides a voice, heals the hurt and breaks the cycle of abuse and neglect for children in Fort Bend County.

Civil Rights
3
Casa of Tipton County

Child Advocacy Services

Crime & Legal
4
Casa of Williamson County Texas

CASA of Williamson County, TX exists to empower community volunteers to advocate for children who have experienced abuse or neglect to find loving, safe, and permanent homes.

Crime & Legal
5
Court Appointed Special Advocates in the Heart of Texas

Training and supporting quality volunteers who speak out for the best interest of abused and neglected children in court in an effort to find each child a safe, permanent, nurturing home.

Civil Rights
6
The Childrens House

To reduce trauma to children who have experienced abuse as well as their families by providing a safe and supportive environment through a collaboration of community agencies.

—
7
The Humane Society of Austin & Travis County Inc

The austin humane society (ahs) offers comprehensive, humane, life-saving animal services, transforming the lives of animals and those who love them. because we believe homeless animals deserve a chance to thrive in a loving environment,…

Animals
8
Children's Advocacy Center of Greater West Texas

The children's advocacy center of greater west texas, inc.'s mission is to champion the prevention of child abuse and to serve as an ally of abused children with a dedication to securing a safe and nurturing home for each child.

Civil Rights
9
Central Texas Children's Home

To provide family services and to provide residential child care for dependent children where there is a need to assist children and families disrupted by problems.

Human Services
10
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Mercer County Inc

Our mission is to train and supervise community volunteers appointed by the family court to advocate for the best interests of children who have been removed from their homes due to abuse and/or neglect. our dedicated volunteers strive to…

Human Services
11
Children's Aid Society of West Tx Inc

To provide shelter, supervision, and counseling for children in crisis; to cooperate with other agencies in order to resolve problems related to the welfare of these children; to assist the families of these children in seeking possible…

Human Services
12
Central Texas Spca

Rescue neglected, unwanted homeless dogs and cats nurture and provide shelter until they are placed with a forever family strive to reduce animal overpopulation prevent cruelty to animals teach responsible pet ownership through an outreach…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Alliance for Children Inc; the most unlike its peers is Humane World for Animals Inc. 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

13 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. 13 of the 19 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GRACE: $115,000 · OtherGRACEMETROPORT MEALS ON WHEELS INC: $55,000 · OtherMETROPORT MEALS ON WHEELS INCTarrant County Food Bank: $20,000 · OtherTarrant County Food BankCHRISTIAN COMMUNITY STOREHOUSE INC: $10,250 · OtherTarrant Area Food Bank: $10,000 · Other+5 more: $3,650 · OtherThe Family Place: $10,000 · Human ServicesCENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVES: $2,500 · Human ServicesALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC: $10,015 · Civil Rights+1 more: $200 · Civil RightsAPOLLO SUPPORT & RESCUE INC: $3,000 · Animals+2 more: $153 · AnimalsSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $1,000 · EducationWI Cook Foundation Inc: $25 · Health
Other$213,900Human Services$12,500Civil Rights$10,215Animals$3,153Education$1,000Health$25

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMETROPORT MEALS ON WHEELS INC: $55,000 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetCHRISTIAN COMMUNITY STOREHOUSE INC: $10,250 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC: $10,015 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetThe Family Place: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTarrant Area Food Bank: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAPOLLO SUPPORT & RESCUE INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVES: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF DENTON COUNTY INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetChrist's Haven for Children Inc: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHumane World for Animals Inc: $53 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWI Cook Foundation Inc: $25 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Textron Charitable Tr…Bnsf Railway Foundati…Communities Foundatio…The Ninnie L Baird Fo…America's CharitiesMcKesson Foundation I…Norman M Kronick Fort…Capital for KidsAmon G Carter Foundat…Coserv Charitable Fou…Sid W Richardson Foun…Ken W Davis Foundation
Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353RI19.1× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353 · Bnsf Railway Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · The Ninnie L Baird Foundation · America's Charities · McKesson Foundation Inc · Norman M Kronick Fort Worth Foundation · Capital for Kids · Amon G Carter Foundation · Coserv Charitable Foundation · Sid W Richardson Foundation · Ken W Davis 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 Hartnett Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Hartnett Foundation. 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%25%50%75%100%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
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Hartnett Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Hartnett 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.

    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 19 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Hartnett’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