Skip to content

· Private foundation

Huffman Family Philanthropic

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$46k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2025.

Health$23kEducation$18kInternational$18kHuman Services$14kArts & Culture$13kCommunity Improvement$5k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$4,500
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CENTRAL TEXAS CHILDREN'S HOME$4,831
ST JUDE'S CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL$4,831
TEXAS MUSIC FOUNDATION$4,500
DRIPPING SPRINGS EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION$4,500
FOSTER VILLAGE INC$4,500
CHILDREN OF FALLEN PATRIOTS FOUNDATION$4,500
ORGANIZATION FOR AUTISM RESEARCH$4,500
TEXAS GIRLS AND BOYS RANCH$4,500
SAMARITAN'S PURSE$4,500
HOUSTON'S CHARITY FOR CHILDREN INC$4,500
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 (FY25–25, $14k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 33% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CENTRAL TEXAS CHILDREN'S HOME: $5k → 10%TEXAS GIRLS AND BOYS RANCH: $5k → 17%FOSTER VILLAGE INC: $5k → 10%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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$64k · 5 repeat orgs$27k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
1

Total granted

$64k
$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-25%
+12%

Still filing today

60%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $23k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesReligionHealthInternationalCommunity ImprovementEducationOther
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

  • SP
    SAMARITAN'S PURSE
    4× · 2022–2025 · $14k · revenue +40%
  • ORGANIZATION FOR AUTISM RESEARCH
    3× · 2023–2025 · $13k · revenue -25%
  • TM
    TEXAS MUSIC FOUNDATION
    3× · 2023–2025 · $13k

Funded once

  • NL
    New Life Advance International Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $4k · revenue +12%
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
Childrens House International

Children's house international provides ethical adoption services, child focused recruitment, and family support. we support disadvantaged children with humanitarian aid in countries worldwide.

—
2
Children's Home of Lubbock and Family Service Agency Inc

Working in creative collaboration to provide quality care that transforms the lives of at-risk children and their families through the active compassion of christ.

Human Services
3
Childcare Worldwide

Childcare Worldwide (CW) transforms children's lives by exposing them to the gospel of Jesus Christ, providing for their physical needs, and sponsoring their education. We connect sponsors with children through Christ-based life centers.…

International
4
Child Hope International

We minister to orphans and widows in their distress by transitioning children from orphanages into loving families. We do this through Christ- centered care, training and social work.

Arts & Culture
5
Christianity Today International

Christianity Today is a global community inspired by evangelical conviction to advance the stories and ideas of the kingdom of God. Our mission is to elevate the storytellers and sages of the global church.

Religion
6
National Christian Foundation -- Wisconsin Inc

Equipping followers of christ to give wisely to advance his kingdom by inspiring biblical stewardship and generosity.

Religion
7
Christian Works for Children Inc

Adoption, maternity & parenting services, family & individual counseling, children's support groups

Human Services
8
Children At Heart Ministries Inc

Children at heart ministries is a family of christian ministries that exists to honor god and build a better world by serving children and strengthening families.

Human Services
9
Dallas International University

As a christian university, we provide education and research opportunities preparing global leaders to partner with local communities.

Education
10
Children to Love International

Children to love is focused on meeting the needs of the suffering children of the world, providing help and assistance to empower 'the least of these'(matthew 25:40). through education, spiritual teaching, economic support, physical…

International
11
Covenant Christian School

Covenant Christian School (CCS) is committed to the academic, spiritual, physical, and social growth of our children in a Christ-centered environment. Continued on Schedule O Covenant Christian School cultivates a distinctive generation…

Education
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Texas Girls and Boys Ranch; the most unlike its peers is Samaritan's Purse. 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

9 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. 9 of the 11 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TEXAS MUSIC FOUNDATION: $13,400 · OtherTEXAS MUSIC FOUNDATIONDRIPPING SPRINGS EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $13,400 · OtherDRIPPING SPRINGS EDUCATION FOUNDATIONST JUDE'S CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL: $9,732 · OtherST JUDE'S CHILDREN'S HOSPITALCentral Texas Children's Home: $4,831 · Human ServicesCentral Texas Chi…TEXAS GIRLS AND BOYS RANCH: $4,500 · Human ServicesTEXAS GIRLS AND B…FOSTER VILLAGE INC: $4,500 · Human ServicesFOSTER VILLAGE IN…SAMARITAN'S PURSE: $13,750 · ReligionSAMARITAN'S PURSEORGANIZATION FOR AUTISM RESEARCH: $13,400 · HealthORGANIZATION FOR…HOUSTON'S CHARITY FOR CHILDREN INC: $4,500 · Community ImprovementChildren of Fallen Patriots Foundation: $4,500 · EducationNew Life Advance International Inc: $4,000 · International
Other$36,532Human Services$13,831Religion$13,750Health$13,400Community Improvement$4,500Education$4,500International$4,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSAMARITAN'S PURSE: $13,750 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetORGANIZATION FOR AUTISM RESEARCH: $13,400 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetDRIPPING SPRINGS EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $13,400 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetTEXAS GIRLS AND BOYS RANCH: $4,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHOUSTON'S CHARITY FOR CHILDREN INC: $4,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetChildren of Fallen Patriots Foundation: $4,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNew Life Advance International Inc: $4,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Huffman Family Philanthropic funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Huffman Family Philanthropic. 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Huffman Family Philanthropic?

    Find your warmest path to Huffman Family Philanthropic 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 11 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 Huffman Family Philanthropic’s filings →

    More from the funding graph