· Public charity
Houston Safari Club Foundation
Preserving the sport of hunting through education, conservation, and the promotion of our hunting heritage.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 11 grants below total $228,393 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $247,143 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $18,750 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $7k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $131k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $90k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SAN ANTONIO AREA FOUNDATION | $90,000 |
| TEXAS A&M UNIVERISTY-VET PATHOBIOLO | $24,000 |
| TEXAS WILDLIFE ASSOC FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| OUTDOORS TOMORROW FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| WORKING DOGS FOR CONSERVATION | $15,000 |
| NORTH TEXAS RESEARCH PROGRAM | $15,000 |
| TEXAS A&M UNIVERISTY-NATURAL RESOUR | $11,605 |
| ALL OTHER GRANTS 5000 EACH | $10,847 |
| TEXAS PARKS & WILDLIFE FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| COASTAL PRAIRIE CONSERVANCY | $10,000 |
| THE LODGE ON SAN JULIAN CREEK | $6,941 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 85% of your 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +38% since the first grant, against +1% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 5 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, 55% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $62k 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
- TUTHE UNITED STATES SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE FOUNDATION INC6× · 2017–2023 · $108k · revenue +125%
- FFFOUNDATION FOR TX WILDLIFE7× · 2019–2025 · $90k · revenue +38%
- CFCONSERVATION FORCE INC4× · 2019–2022 · $80k · revenue +4%
Funded once
- OTOUTDOORS TOMORROW FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $15k
- TITHE IVAN CARTER WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ALLIANCE INCone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -71%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $10k
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.
Fish and wildlife conservation and outreach including public awareness. Fifteen public relations campaign on social media with over 7.5 million impressions. Twenty plus speaking engagements to a variety of conservation organizations…
Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.
To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.
To facilitate research and development within the texas a&m university system and selected other entities.
Trinity Park Conservancy champions the transformation of the Trinity River to become the heart of Dallas. With the community, the Conservancy will design public spaces that unite us, enrich people's lives through access to nature, create…
To support texas land trusts and promote land conservation efforts in texas. host texas land conservation conference to educate conservation related professionals and volunteers from across the state.
Arizona Wildlife Federation's purpose is to promote and encourage the conservation, propagation, development and management of fish, game and other wildlife; to promote and encourage the wise use, conservation and restoration of waters,…
To champion a collaborative campaign to permanently connect, protect and restore the Florida Wildlife Corridor, a statewide network of lands and waters that supports wildlife and people. We combine conservation science with compelling…
Conservation legacy engages future leaders who protect, restore, and enhance our nation's lands through community-based service.in 2024, conservation legacy engaged 2,524 participants who completed over 1.5 million service hours on public…
Texas water foundation is a statewide nonprofit that provides educational resources and educational services on water in texas for decision makers, water professionals, and everyday texans. texas water foundation works in the areas of…
The mission of the South Fork Conservancy is to restore and preserve habitat along the tributaries of Peachtree Creek. We give the community access to these healthy, restored greenspaces by designing, building and maintaining nature trails.
Creating a greener, healthier, more equitable, and better Washington for all through community outreach, network building, and advocacy for conservation and outdoor recreation funding.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Parks and Wildlife Foundation of Texas and the most unlike its peers is The Ivan Carter Wildlife Conservation Alliance Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
13 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. 13 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 SAN ANTONIO AREA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE UNITED STATES SPORTSMEN'S ALLIANCE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR TX WILDLIFE ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION FORCE INC ↗
- Who funds CONGRESSIONAL SPORTSMEN'S FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DALLAS ECOLOGICAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Texas A&M Foundation ↗
- Who funds Working Dogs For Conservation Found ↗
- Who funds THE IVAN CARTER WILDLIFE CONSERVATION ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds Coastal Prairie Conservancy ↗
- Who funds PARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXAS ↗
- Who funds New Mexico State Univ Fdn Inc ↗
- Who funds TRINITY OAKS ENTERPRISES ↗
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: Dsc Foundation Inc · Bass Pro Shops & Cabelas Outdoor Fund · Greater Houston Community Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Houston Safari Club · International Order of T Roosevelt · Weatherby Foundation International Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 Houston Safari Club 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.