Skip to content
J H Tappan and Winnie Converse Tappan Perpetual Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

J H Tappan and Winnie Converse Tappan Perpetual Charitable Trust

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$6k
Granted FY2024still arriving
12
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Animals$29kEnvironment$6kHuman Services$2kRecreation & Sports$500
02FY2024 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$300
Median grant
2
States reached
$156k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO$2,700
WILDLIFE RESCUE & REHABILITATION$500
IN-SYNC EXOTICS$400
PEEWEE'S PET ADOPTION WORLD & SANCTUARY$350
PRIMARILY PRIMATES$350
HEADWATERS AT INCARNATE WORD$300
SAN ANTONIO RIVER FOUNDATION$300
SAN ANTONIO ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY$300
DUCKS UNLIMITED$250
HOUSTON HUMANE SOCIETY WILDLIFE CENTER$250
GUIDE DOGS OF TEXAS$250
AUSTIN HUMANE SOCIETY$200
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 (FY19–24, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%GUIDE DOGS OF TEXAS: $300 → 16%GUIDE DOGS OF TEXAS: $250 → 16%GUIDE DOGS OF TEXAS: $250 → 16%GUIDE DOGS OF TEXAS: $250 → 16%GUIDE DOGS OF TEXAS: $250 → 16%GUIDE DOGS OF TEXAS: $200 → 16%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$35k · 12 repeat orgs$2k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +56% since the first grant, against +29% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
3

Total granted

$35k
$1k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+56%
+29%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $250 went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
AnimalsEnvironmentRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesCrime & LegalOther
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

  • WR
    WILDLIFE RESCUE AND REHABILITATION INC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $4k · revenue +56%
  • SA
    SAN ANTONIO ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY
    6× · 2019–2024 · $2k · revenue +114%
  • DU
    Ducks Unlimited Inc
    6× · 2019–2024 · $2k · revenue +89%

Funded once

  • HC
    HEMISFAIR CONSERVANCYgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $500 · revenue +109%
  • SA
    Spay-Neuter Assistance Program Inc
    one grant, 2019 · $500 · revenue +11%
  • BP
    Brackenridge Park Conservancygraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $250 · revenue +29%
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
Central Texas Animal Sanctuary

Animal rescue and rehabilitation

Animals
2
San Antonio Pets Alive Inc

The mission of San Antonio Pets Alive! is to save every adoptable dog and cat in danger of being killed at the City of San Antonio Shelter.

Animals
3
Animal Resource Center Inc

To prevent the overpopulation of cats and dogs by funding spay and neuter services for domestic animals owned by the residents of San Antonio and Bexar County. To develop, promote, and sponsor programs of education to encourage better…

—
4
Progressive Animal Welfare Society aka Paws

A champion for animals since 1967, PAWS is a nationally recognized leader - rehabilitating injured and orphaned wildlife, sheltering and adopting homeless cats and dogs, and educating people to make a better world for animals and people.

Animals
5
Wild West Wildlife Rehabilitation Center

The organization is dedicated to rescuing, rehabilitating and releasing orphaned and injured wildlife in the texas panhandle.

Animals
6
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
7
Helotes Humane Society

Rescue and place abandoned and unwanted pets. Provide low cost spay / neuter. Provide low-cost microchips. Provide community education.

Animals
8
South Texas Animal Rescue Group

We own and operate a spay/neuter and wellness clinic. Our purpose is to end animal cruelty in Texas, spay/neuter, vaccinate, and end the dumping and abandonment of cats and dogs. We also have an education program to teach Texas residents…

Animals
9
Laurels House

Laurel's House strengthens the human animal bond improves public health decreases the number of companion animal euthanasia due to overpopulation and diminishes human impact on native wildlife species by providing unprecedented access to…

—
10
Humane Society of Central Texas

As an advocate for the community goal of maintaining its no kill status, the humane society provides adoption, rescue and foster opportunities for the homeless animals at the city of waco animal shelter, as well as community education…

Animals
11
Animal Care Sanctuary

Animal care sanctuary's lifesaving mission as a no kill organization envisions a community that promotes turning compassion into action for companion animals by: 1.) adopting healthy pet companions into loving homes. 2.) promoting the…

Animals
12
Houston Pets Alive

Houston Pets Alive!s (HPA!) mission is to save the lives of at-risk companion cats and dogs and find them loving homes.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Humane Society of San Antonio (Audit); the most unlike its peers is Guide Dogs of Texas 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

15 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. 15 of the 16 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
12/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO (AUDIT): $15,100 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO (AUDIT)WILDLIFE RESCUE AND REHABILITATION INC: $3,700 · AnimalsWILDLIFE RESCUE AND REHABILITATION INCSAN ANTONIO ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $2,450 · AnimalsSAN ANTONIO ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETYINSYNC EXOTIC INC: $1,960 · AnimalsINSYNC EXOTIC INCPEEWEE'S PET ADOPTION WORLD & SANCTUARY INC: $1,750 · AnimalsPEEWEE'S PET ADOPTION WORLD & SANCTUARY INCPRIMARILY PRIMATES INC: $1,570 · AnimalsPRIMARILY PRIMATES INC+2 more: $1,300 · AnimalsDucks Unlimited Inc: $2,200 · EnvironmentDucks Unlim…SAN ANTONIO RIVER FOUNDATION: $1,650 · EnvironmentSAN ANTONIO…Guide Dogs of Texas Inc: $1,500 · Human ServicesHeadwaters at Incarnate Word Inc: $1,400 · Crime & LegalTEXAS WILDLIFE REHABILITATION COALITION INC: $900 · OtherHOUSTON HUMANE SOCIETY WILDLIFE CENTER: $250 · OtherHEMISFAIR CONSERVANCY: $500 · Recreation & SportsBrackenridge Park Conservancy: $250 · Recreation & Sports
Animals$27,830Environment$3,850Human Services$1,500Crime & Legal$1,400Other$1,150Recreation & Sports$750

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 budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO (AUDIT): $15,100 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetWILDLIFE RESCUE AND REHABILITATION INC: $3,700 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetSAN ANTONIO ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY: $2,450 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetDucks Unlimited Inc: $2,200 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetINSYNC EXOTIC INC: $1,960 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetPEEWEE'S PET ADOPTION WORLD & SANCTUARY INC: $1,750 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSAN ANTONIO RIVER FOUNDATION: $1,650 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetPRIMARILY PRIMATES INC: $1,570 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetGuide Dogs of Texas Inc: $1,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetHeadwaters at Incarnate Word Inc: $1,400 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTEXAS WILDLIFE REHABILITATION COALITION INC: $900 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetTHE HUMANE SOCIETY OF AUSTIN & TRAVIS COUNTY INC: $800 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHEMISFAIR CONSERVANCY: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSpay-Neuter Assistance Program Inc: $500 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.

San Antonio Area Foun…Faye L & William L Co…Amy Shelton McNutt Ch…Elizabeth Huth Coates…Hixon Family Foundati…Pryor Myra Stafford C…Betty Stieren Kelso F…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Shell USA Company Fou…Alfred S Gage Foundat…Cb and Anita Branch T…Charitable Foundation…
San Antonio Area FoundationTX21.7× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: San Antonio Area Foundation · Faye L & William L Cowden Charitable Foundation · Amy Shelton McNutt Charitable Trust · Elizabeth Huth Coates Charitable Foundation of 1992 · Hixon Family Foundation · Pryor Myra Stafford Char Tr F0030100 · Betty Stieren Kelso Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Alfred S Gage Foundation · Cb and Anita Branch Trust James L Drought Trustee · Charitable Foundation Frost F0359600

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 J H Tappan and Winnie Converse Tappan Perpetual Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from J H Tappan and Winnie Converse Tappan Perpetual Charitable Trust. 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%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 J H Tappan and Winnie Converse Tappan Perpetual Charitable Trust?

    Find your warmest path to J H Tappan and Winnie Converse Tappan Perpetual Charitable Trust 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 16 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on J H Tappan and Winnie Converse Tappan Perpetual’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