Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

J Tom Eady Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$618k
Granted FY2025still arriving
44
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What you fund
0195% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202025.

Education$786kReligion$415kHuman Services$394kPhilanthropy$339kArts & Culture$327kYouth Development$127kPublic Benefit$108kHealth$84kOther$0
02FY2025 · 44 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k30 grants · $124k
  • $10k–50k10 grants · $167k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $327k
$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$8.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NAVARRO COLLEGE FOUNDATIONS$100,000
FIRST METHODIST CHURCH$89,400
Individual grant recipient$87,500
UNITED WAY OF NAVARRO COUNTY$50,000
HUMANE SOCIETY OF NAVARRO COUNTY$25,000
NAVARRO COUNTY YOUTH EXPOSITION$20,000
PALACE THEATRE$20,000
HOPE CENTER$20,000
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF GREATER DALL$15,000
NAVARRO COUNTY AMBULATORY CARE ASSN$15,000
CORSICANA NAVARRO COUNTY PUBLIC HEA$15,000
COMPASSION CORSICANA$15,000
SALVATION ARMY$12,035
CHRISTMAS IN ACTION NAVARRO COUNTY$10,000
VOICE$8,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–23, $77k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 55% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%MEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTAL TEXAS: $25k → 10%MEAL ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS: $10k → 10%MARY PETERSON CHILD CARE CENTER: $23k → 23%MARY PETERSON CHILD CARE CENTER: $14k → 23%MARY PETERSON CHILD CARE CENTER: $4k → 23%MARY PETERSON CHILD CARE CENTER: $2k → 23%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$3.2M · 67 repeat orgs$154k to everyone else

67 repeat relationships — 35 still active in FY2025, 32 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

67
13

Total granted

$3.2M
$89k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
+142%

Still filing today

10%
8%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $65k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureHealthAnimalsOther

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

  • NC
    NAVARRO COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2020–2025 · $247k · revenue +23%
  • NC
    NAVARRO COUNCIL OF THE ARTS INC
    4× · 2020–2023 · $125k · revenue +4%
  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY OF NAVARRO COUNTY
    4× · 2022–2025 · $55k · revenue +47%

Funded once

  • CN
    CORSICANA - NAVARRO COUNTY PUBLIC H
    one grant, 2022 · $15k
  • NC
    NAVARRO COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH DIST
    one grant, 2020 · $15k
  • CI
    CHRISTMAS IN ACTION
    one grant, 2021 · $15k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Corsicana Area Chamber of Commerce

To promote Corsicana and the surrounding area.

2
Brazoria County Hispanic Chamber of Commerce

Promote hispanic business in brazoria county, texas by increasing opportunities, networking and providing access to resources.

Community Improvement
3
Vocational Nursing Institute Inc

Provide a quality education to vocational nursing students with a goal of 100% pass rate on the NCLEX Exam.

Education
4
Panola County Chamber of Commerce

Promotion of commerce in panola county texas

5
Nacogdoches Treatment Center for Hanicapped Children and Adults Inc

Treatment of handicapped and disabled children and adults and providing job training for disabled persons. Providing activities for Alzheimer's Disease patients.

Health
6
Northeast Texas Community College Foundation Inc

The foundation's purpose is to receive and administer gifts and grants to enhance educational excellence at northeast texas community college.

Philanthropy
7
Texas Agricultural Education & Heritage Center

Agricultural education & heritage of farming

Arts & Culture
8
Northern New Mexico College Foundation

Increase, manage, and distribute resources for the benefit of the students, the college, and the community

Education
9
San Marcos Area Chamber of Commerce

To improve the economic well being of the greater san marcos area

10
National Commission On Correctional Health Care

The commission was formed to promote educational and research activity in correctional health care; and to devise, develop and implement programs that will improve the health care provided for inmates of prisons, jails, detention and…

Crime & Legal
11
United Way of Navarro County Texas Inc

The united fund provides funds to charitable organizations that provide aid to the community and individuals in need.

12
Center City of Amarillo Inc

Center city of amarillo, inc., brings people to downtown amarillo through organization, events, promotion, design and facilitation of economic restructuring.

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Navarro Council of the Arts Inc and the most unlike its peers is Corsicana Isd Education Foundation 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

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 89 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Individual grant recipient — $545,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientUNITED WAY OF NAVARRO COUNTY — $249,700 · OtherUNITED WAY OF NAVARRO COUNTYFIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH — $233,300 · OtherFIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCHFIRST METHODIST CHURCH — $156,650 · OtherFIRST METHODIST CHURCHIndividual grant recipient — $126,070 · OtherPALACE THEATRE — $124,250 · OtherCOMPASSION CORSICANA — $115,500 · OtherHOPE CENTER INC — $95,500 · Other+74 more — $1,199,844 · Other+74 moreNAVARRO COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC — $246,500 · EducationCORSICANA ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC — $22,500 · EducationNAVARRO COUNCIL OF THE ARTS INC — $125,000 · Arts & CultureMARY PETERSON CHILD CARE CENTER — $42,030 · Human ServicesMEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC — $35,000 · Human ServicesHUMANE SOCIETY OF NAVARRO COUNTY — $55,000 · AnimalsNAVARRO COUNTY AMBULATORY CARE ASSOCIATION — $30,000 · Health
Other$2,846,314Education$269,000Arts & Culture$125,000Human Services$77,030Animals$55,000Health$30,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNAVARRO COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC — $246,500 over 4y, 7.4% of budgetNAVARRO COUNCIL OF THE ARTS INC — $125,000 over 4y, 14% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF NAVARRO COUNTY — $55,000 over 4y, 8.6% of budgetMARY PETERSON CHILD CARE CENTER — $42,030 over 4y, 7.4% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC — $35,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetNAVARRO COUNTY AMBULATORY CARE ASSOCIATION — $30,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetCORSICANA ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC — $22,500 over 4y, 6.0% of budgetNAVARRO CO EXPOSITION CENTER — $12,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budget
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 NAVARRO COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds NAVARRO COUNCIL OF THE ARTS INC
  • Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF NAVARRO COUNTY
  • Who funds MARY PETERSON CHILD CARE CENTER
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC
  • Who funds NAVARRO COUNTY AMBULATORY CARE ASSOCIATION
  • Who funds CORSICANA ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC

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.

Faye Murray & Mae Wardlaw Charitable FoundationTX17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Faye Murray & Mae Wardlaw Charitable Foundation · Pearl Thornell Charitable Foundation · The Moran Family Foundation · Navarro Community Foundation · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 J Tom Eady Charitable Trust 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%your 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
    5report 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, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 89 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph