· Private foundation
Jastrow Foundation
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.
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.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k3 grants · $9k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $40k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN | $50,000 |
| THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF THE GOOD SHEPHERD | $20,000 |
| ST DAVID'S FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| PEOPLES COMMUNITY CLINIC | $10,000 |
| STEPHEN F AUSTIN SOCIETY | $5,000 |
| EPISCOPAL THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY OF THE SOUTHWEST | $2,500 |
| DELL CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION-GRANDPARENTS TRUST | $1,000 |
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 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 97% 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.
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 +111% since the first grant, against -19% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 2 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, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k 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
TEXAS TRIBUNE INC7× · 2017–2023 · $175k · revenue +118%- PCPEOPLE'S COMMUNITY CLINIC INC9× · 2017–2025 · $93k · revenue +82%
- SDST DAVID'S FOUNDATION7× · 2019–2025 · $70k · revenue +85%
Funded once
- UOUniversity of Texas Subiendoone grant, 2017 · $50k
- GSGood Shepherd Episcopal Church-Building the Beloved Communityone grant, 2017 · $50k
- KFKKG FoundationBeta Xi KKG House Project-Austinone grant, 2017 · $25k
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.
To facilitate research and development within the texas a&m university system and selected other entities.
The foundation is committed to serving charitable needs both domestically and abroad through charitable grants and services at the discretion of the board of trustees.
The baylor oral health foundation was established to foster and support the activities and program of the texas a&m university college of dentistry (the college) to provide financial support for excellence at the college, and to advance…
The texas a&m foundation builds a brighter future for texas a&m university, one relationship at a time, by uniting generosity and vision to raise support and manage endowed gifts.
Operated exclusively for educational purposes specifically including to further educational activities at texas a& m university-central texas within the meaning of 501(c)(3).
To create a healthier future for children and women throughout our global community by leading in patient care, education and research.
To generate superior long-term investment returns to support The University of Texas and Texas A&M University systems as they provide world-class teaching, push the boundaries of discovery, and achieve excellence in patient healthcare for…
The forty first foundation supports and advances the university of texas at austin in its pursuit of excellence. we work closely with the office of the president to identify, fund, and implement strategic initiatives that enhance the…
Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.
Dallas college foundation enhances the level of achievement and excellence of dallas college by providing scholarships, eliminating barriers that prevent students from attending and graduating, and supporting innovation.
Provide anesthesia services to patients at children's medical center of dallas. these services are provided without regard to a patient's ability to pay for the services.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dell Children's Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Science Mill. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 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. 11 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 TEXAS TRIBUNE INC ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE'S COMMUNITY CLINIC INC ↗
- Who funds ST DAVID'S FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SCIENCE MILL ↗
- Who funds ST DAVID'S FOUNDATION COMMUNITY FUND ↗
- Who funds Austin Community College Foundation ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WEST TEXAS A&M UNIV FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL TEXAS PUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSION ↗
- Who funds DELL CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION ↗
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: Austin Community Foundation Inc · Dallas Jewish Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Jastrow 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Jastrow Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Jastrow 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.