Skip to content
Helen Gertrude Sparks Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Helen Gertrude Sparks Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$30k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$10k
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 2025.

Education$50kHuman Services$35kYouth Development$30kCrime & Legal$30kHealth$25kHousing & Shelter$25kFood & Nutrition$10kRecreation & Sports$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$634k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SURVIVE AND THRIVE EDUCATION$10,000
TEXAS RAMP PROJECT$10,000
ALL SAINTS HEALTH FOUNDATION$10,000
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 (FY19–23, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%SIXTY & BETTER: $10k → 11%GUARDIANSHIP SERVICES INC: $10k → 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.

24%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$55k · 3 repeat orgs$170k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +38% since the first grant, against +4% for those funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
18

Total granted

$55k
$150k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+38%
+4%

Still filing today

100%
72%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 33% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesCivil RightsHousing & ShelterArts & CultureRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • TR
    TEXAS RAMP PROJECT
    3× · 2017–2025 · $25k · revenue +144%
  • CO
    CASA OF TARRANT COUNTY INC
    2× · 2018–2021 · $20k · revenue +38%
  • KW
    KIDS WHO CARE INC
    2× · 2017–2019 · $10k · revenue -23%

Funded once

  • TH
    THE HILL SCHOOL OF FORT WORTH INC
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -10%
  • RP
    READING PARTNERS
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
  • NK
    NEW KEY SCHOOL INC
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue +10%
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
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
2
North Texas Rehabilitation Center Inc

To improve the quality of life for children and adults in North Texas and Southern Oklahoma through medical rehabilitation, and developmental, educational, and wellness services.

Health
3
Childrens Advocacy Center of West Texas Inc

The Organizations mission is to bring unity and efficiency to investigations of child abuse through the use of a multi-disciplinary team and, thereby, to provide the best possible services to victims of child abuse and their families.

Crime & Legal
4
Achievement Center of Texas Inc

Provide day care, day habilitation (life skills training), arts exploration, educational assistance and community inclusion for children and young adults with special needs.

Human Services
5
The Arc of North Texas

To support and empower people with intellectual and developmental disabilities to improve their quality of life.

—
6
Dallas Services

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.

—
7
Family and Child Guidance Center

Our mission is to provide quality mental health services to children and adults in low income families who are impacted by severe and persistent mental illness, emotional disturbances, child abuse and neglect, high-risk behaviors and…

Health
8
Lone Star Casa Inc

Lone Star CASA elevates the voices of children in Kaufman and Rockwall County who have experienced abuse and neglect by providing trained volunteer advocates to work alongside children and families so they can achieve safety and stability…

Civil Rights
9
Head Start of Greater Dallas Inc

Head start of greater dallas, inc. provides children with the foundation of skills and knowledge they need to be successful in school and life and fosters self-reliant families and communities.

Education
10
Texans Care for Children Inc

Texans Care for Children shapes public policies and brings Texans together to make children a statewide priority. We work so kids can have what they need to be healthy, secure, and thriving and so every Texan can have the best start to…

Crime & Legal
11
Fort Worth Teen Challenge Inc

Provide rehabilitation services and guidance to follow Christian principles to restore teens and young adults sufferning from addictions and trauma and ultimately placing them back into society as positive contributors

—
12
Children's Alliance of South Texas

To provide a neutral, child friendly organization that facilitates a multi-disciplinary approach to the investigation, intervention and treatment of child abuse.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Alliance for Children Inc; the most unlike its peers is Survive and Thrive Education. 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

19 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. 19 of the 23 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
11/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

READING PARTNERS: $10,000 · OtherREADING PARTNERSMEALS ON WHEELS INC OF: $10,000 · OtherMEALS ON WHEELS INC OFKIDS WHO CARE INC: $10,000 · OtherKIDS WHO CARE INCBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF ARLINGTON INC: $10,000 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF ARLINGTON INCTHE GATEHOUSE CORPORATION: $10,000 · OtherTHE GATEHOUSE CORPORATIONBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS: $10,000 · OtherBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERSIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMETHODIST JUSTICE MINISTRY OF FUMC: $5,000 · OtherHelping Restore Ability: $5,000 · OtherAll Saints Health Foundation: $10,000 · OtherAll Saints Health FoundationCHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER FOR NORTH TEXAS INC: $5,000 · OtherIMAGINATION FORT WORTH: $5,000 · OtherGUARDIANSHIP SERVICES INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesGUARDIANSHIP SE…SIXTY AND BETTER INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesSIXTY AND BETTE…Wings of Hope Equitherapy: $10,000 · Human ServicesWings of Hope E…TEXAS RAMP PROJECT: $25,000 · Housing & ShelterTEXAS RAMP P…CASA OF TARRANT COUNTY INC: $20,000 · Civil RightsCASA OF TARR…ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC: $5,000 · Civil RightsALLIANCE FOR…THE HILL SCHOOL OF FORT WORTH INC: $10,000 · EducationTHE HILL SCH…NEW KEY SCHOOL INC: $10,000 · EducationNEW KEY SCHO…GILL CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC: $5,000 · EducationGILL CHILDRE…FORT WORTH DROWNING PREVENTION COALITION: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsSURVIVE AND THRIVE EDUCATION: $10,000 · Youth Development
Other$100,000Human Services$30,000Housing & Shelter$25,000Civil Rights$25,000Education$25,000Recreation & Sports$10,000Youth Development$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTEXAS RAMP PROJECT: $25,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetCASA OF TARRANT COUNTY INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetTHE HILL SCHOOL OF FORT WORTH INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNEW KEY SCHOOL INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFORT WORTH DROWNING PREVENTION COALITION: $10,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetGUARDIANSHIP SERVICES INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSIXTY AND BETTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetKIDS WHO CARE INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetWings of Hope Equitherapy: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetAll Saints Health Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE GATEHOUSE CORPORATION: $10,000 over 1y, 22% of budgetMETHODIST JUSTICE MINISTRY OF FUMC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGILL CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetCHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER FOR NORTH TEXAS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHelping Restore Ability: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIMAGINATION FORT WORTH: $5,000 over 1y, 1.4% 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.

Community Foundation …Thomas M Helen McKee …Ann L Rhodes and Caro…Helen Irwin Littauer …Communities Foundatio…Amon G Carter-Star Te…Mary Potishman Lard T…Amon G Carter Foundat…Leo Potishman Foundat…The Morris FoundationGarvey Texas Foundati…Ken W Davis Foundation
Community Foundation of North Texas (TaxTX34.9× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · Thomas M Helen McKee & John P Ryan Fo John P Ryan Foundation Inc · Ann L Rhodes and Carol Greene Rhodes · Helen Irwin Littauer Educational Trust · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Amon G Carter-Star Tele Emply Fund · Mary Potishman Lard Trust Walker C Friedman Co Trustee · Amon G Carter Foundation · Leo Potishman Foundation Xxxxx3002 · The Morris Foundation · Garvey Texas Foundation Inc · 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 Helen Gertrude Sparks Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Helen Gertrude Sparks Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 23 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 Helen Gertrude Sparks’ 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