Skip to content
Jackson-Shaw Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Jackson-Shaw Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$24k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$5k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Youth Development$273kReligion$34kRecreation & Sports$30kPhilanthropy$28kPublic Safety & Disaster$7kEducation$5kHuman Services$3kHousing & Shelter$3kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$30k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DEL VALLE LITTLE LEAGUE$5,000
THE HOPE 3741 MINISTRIES$5,000
St Vincent De Paul Diocese of Phoenix$5,000
Phoenix Police Foundation$5,000
TD Club Foundation$2,500
Acts4Rwanda Inc$1,000
Together We Thrive$250
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 (FY23–23, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YMCA OF METROPOLITAN FORT WORTH: $3k → 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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$276k · 8 repeat orgs$89k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +88% since the first grant, against +20% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
19

Total granted

$276k
$76k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+88%
+20%

Still filing today

75%
58%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 42% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $14k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Youth DevelopmentEducationReligionHealthRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesOther
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

  • BG
    BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER TARRANT COUNTY INC
    2× · 2021–2022 · $160k · revenue +37%
  • BG
    BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER DALLAS INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $66k · revenue +22%
  • TH
    THE HOPE 3741 MINISTRIES
    3× · 2022–2024 · $28k · revenue +275% · 82% of their budget

Funded once

  • BA
    BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF DALLASFORT WORTH COMMUNITY PARTNERS AND CHILDREN
    one grant, 2019 · $20k
  • HOUSTON LIVESTOCK SHOW AND RODEO INC
    one grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +20%
  • FW
    FORT WORTH'S HIGHLAND HILLS COMMUNITY CENTER
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
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
Texas Girls and Boys Ranch

Sharing jesus, healing hearts, transforming lives.

Human Services
2
Boys & Girls Clubs of the Midlands

To inspire and enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, responsible, healthy, and caring members of society.

Youth Development
3
Promise Academy

Promise Academy cultivates wise, creative, and compassionate leaders through exemplary Christ-centered education in North Tyler for the joy of our city and the glory of God.

Education
4
Lake Travis Youth Association

LTYA is a youth sports association that offers baseball, basketball, cheer, football, golf, soccer, softball, tennis, and volleyball to participants.

—
5
Texas Wind Athletics

To enrich the lives of homeschool athletes through competitive sports opportunities by developing their athletic talents and nurturing Christian faith, anchored in the word of God.

Recreation & Sports
6
Texas Business Hall of Fame Foundation

To recognize the accomplishments and contributions of our outstanding Texas business leaders and to perpetuate and inspire the values of entrepreneurial spirit, personal integrity, and community leadership in all generations of Texans.

Community Improvement
7
Progress Texas Institute

The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.

Civil Rights
8
Texas Youth Sports & Education Association

This non-profit focus is providing youth sport events.

Recreation & Sports
9
Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater St Louis Inc

To inspire and enable youth ages 6 to 18 to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens. the boys and girls clubs of greater st. louis provides recreational, athletic and educational facilities for youth in…

Youth Development
10
Progress Texas

Progress Texas is a non-profit media organization advocating for progressive ideals and policies in our state.

Civil Rights
11
West Texas Youth Development Inc

First Tee - West Texas' mission is to impact the lives of young people by providing educational programs that build character, instill life-enhancing values, and promote healthy choices through the game of golf.

Recreation & Sports
12
Boys & Girls Clubs of Deep East Texas

To provide a place for children to go where they will have supervised activities, arts, crafts, and recreation.

Youth Development
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater Dallas Inc; the most unlike its peers is Build Them Up Foundation. 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

23 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. 23 of the 33 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/23
Grantees still filing
16/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER TARRANT COUNTY INC: $160,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER TARRANT COUNTY INCBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER DALLAS INC: $66,368 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER DALLAS INC+4 more: $12,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF DALLASFORT WORTH COMMUNITY PARTNERS AND CHILDREN: $20,466 · OtherBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB…FORT WORTH'S HIGHLAND HILLS COMMUNITY CENTER: $9,631 · OtherFORT WORTH'S HIGHLA…LOCKETT FAMILY CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $8,000 · OtherLOCKETT FAMILY CHAR…DEL VALLE LITTLE LEAGUE: $7,500 · OtherDEL VALLE LITTLE LE…BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF FT WORTH: $5,000 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CLUB O…THE PRESBYTERIAN NIGHT SHELTER OF TARRANT COUNTY: $2,508 · OtherBuild Them Up Foundation: $2,500 · OtherYMCA of Metropolitan Fort Worth: $2,500 · Other+9 more: $7,533 · Other+9 moreTHE HOPE 3741 MINISTRIES: $27,500 · ReligionTHE HOPE …DIOCESAN COUNCIL FOR THE SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL DIOCESE PHOENIX: $5,000 · ReligionDIOCESAN …HOUSTON LIVESTOCK SHOW AND RODEO INC: $20,000 · Recreation & SportsCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTH TEXAS (TAX: $20,000 · PhilanthropyPHOENIX POLICE FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · Public Safety & DisasterST TIMOTHY CHRISTIAN ACADEMY: $1,000 · EducationST MARK'S SCHOOL OF TEXAS: $1,000 · EducationWWHS Athletic Booster Club Inc: $1,000 · EducationSTELOS ALLIANCE: $625 · EducationTARRANT AG SCHOLARSHIP CORPORATION: $300 · Education
Youth Development$238,368Other$65,638Religion$32,500Recreation & Sports$20,000Philanthropy$20,000Public Safety & Disaster$5,000Education$3,925

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER TARRANT COUNTY INC: $160,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER DALLAS INC: $66,368 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetTHE HOPE 3741 MINISTRIES: $27,500 over 3y, 82% of budgetHOUSTON LIVESTOCK SHOW AND RODEO INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTH TEXAS (TAX: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPHOENIX POLICE FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetDIOCESAN COUNCIL FOR THE SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL DIOCESE PHOENIX: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF GREATER SCOTTSDALE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBoys and Girls Club of Northeast Florida Inc: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PRESBYTERIAN NIGHT SHELTER OF TARRANT COUNTY: $2,508 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTD CLUB FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBuild Them Up Foundation: $2,500 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetYMCA of Metropolitan Fort Worth: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INC: $1,783 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetST TIMOTHY CHRISTIAN ACADEMY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetST MARK'S SCHOOL OF TEXAS: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWWHS Athletic Booster Club Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetActs 4 Rwanda Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSTELOS ALLIANCE: $625 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOUR FRIENDS PLACE: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBELTSVILLE - ADELPHI BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB INC: $500 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTOGETHER WE THRIVE: $250 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Communities Foundatio…The Rees-Jones Founda…Texas Instruments Fou…The Ayco Charitable F…Baird Foundation IncCharities Aid Foundat…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…National Philanthropi…The Blackbaud Giving …Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…
Communities Foundation of Texas IncTX15.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · The Rees-Jones Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc

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 Jackson-Shaw Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jackson-Shaw Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 Jackson-Shaw Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Jackson-Shaw Foundation 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 33 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 Jackson-Shaw’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