Skip to content
Joanne Bartholomay Jelke Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Joanne Bartholomay Jelke 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.

$72k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$16k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Human Services$69kPhilanthropy$62kInternational$60kRecreation & Sports$38kArts & Culture$24kHealth$14kEducation$10kYouth Development$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $59k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$943k
Total assets

Anchored by a single position: about 97% of reported assets are held in Frost Bank.

Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FRIENDS FOR CHARITY FOUNDATION$16,000
MERCY SHIPS$13,000
FREDERICKSBURG TENNIS CENTER FOUNDATION$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
TEXAS VALOR PROJECT$10,000
BURTON HERITAGE SOCIETY$6,500
BRENHAM PREGNANCY CENTER$6,500
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 (FY21–24, $22k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 55% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 13%TEXAS VALOR PROJECT: $10k → 5%HOPE RISING: $12k → 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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$225k · 7 repeat orgs$73k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +78% since the first grant, against +26% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
5

Total granted

$225k
$43k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+78%
+26%

Still filing today

57%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesInternationalEducationPhilanthropyHealthYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • Mercy Ships International
    5× · 2020–2024 · $60k · revenue +126%
  • UA
    UNITED AGAINST HUMAN TRAFFICKING
    3× · 2021–2023 · $37k · revenue +9%
  • TB
    THOMAS B JELKE FOUNDATION
    2× · 2021–2022 · $18k · revenue +78%

Funded once

  • HR
    Hope Rising dba Hope Rising Ministries
    one grant, 2021 · $12k · revenue +8%
  • MF
    MIRACLE FARM INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +81%
  • TB
    THE BARNHILL 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
Transformation Foundation of Texas Inc
Crime & Legal
2
Texas Trust Gives
Philanthropy
3
Texas Health Harris Methodist Hospital Fort Worth

A faith-based organization whose mission is to improve the health of the people in the communities it serves regardless of their ability to pay.

Health
4
The Good Foundation of Texas
Philanthropy
5
T Foundation
Arts & Culture
6
Texas Back Institute Research Foundation
Health
7
Jtm Foundation
Philanthropy
8
Texans for Lawsuit Reform Foundation
Philanthropy
9
North Central Texas Medical Foundation
Health
10
Scott & White Hospital Brenham

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
11
Texas Bankers Foundation
Education
12
Hope for Justice Inc

Hope for Justice is a human-rights based organization committed to supporting the complex needs of victims and survivors of human trafficking, including forced labor and sexual exploitation. Our mission at Hope for Justice is bringing…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Miracle Farm Inc; the most unlike its peers is Thomas B Jelke 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

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 15 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FRIENDS FOR CHARITY FOUNDATION: $44,000 · OtherFRIENDS FOR CHARITY FOUNDATIONTIM TEBOW FOUNDATION INC: $28,000 · OtherTIM TEBOW FOUNDATION INCBURTON HERITAGE SOCIETY: $24,000 · OtherBURTON HERITAGE SOCIETYMIRACLE FARM INC: $10,000 · OtherMIRACLE FARM INCTHE BARNHILL CENTER: $10,000 · OtherTHE BARNHILL CENTERIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+1 more: $1,000 · OtherMercy Ships International: $60,000 · InternationalMercy Ships Internatio…UNITED AGAINST HUMAN TRAFFICKING: $37,000 · Human ServicesUNITED AGAINST HUMAN T…Hope Rising dba Hope Rising Ministries: $12,000 · Human ServicesHope Rising dba Hope R…TEXAS VALOR PROJECT: $10,000 · Human ServicesTEXAS VALOR PROJECTTHOMAS B JELKE FOUNDATION: $18,000 · PhilanthropyBRENHAM PREGNANCY CENTER: $14,000 · HealthFREDERICKSBURG TENNIS CENTER FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentSouthern Methodist University: $10,000 · Education
Other$127,000International$60,000Human Services$59,000Philanthropy$18,000Health$14,000Youth Development$10,000Education$10,000

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 budgetMercy Ships International: $60,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetUNITED AGAINST HUMAN TRAFFICKING: $37,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetTHOMAS B JELKE FOUNDATION: $18,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetBRENHAM PREGNANCY CENTER: $14,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetHope Rising dba Hope Rising Ministries: $12,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetMIRACLE FARM INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFREDERICKSBURG TENNIS CENTER FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetSouthern Methodist University: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTEXAS VALOR PROJECT: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% 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 Charit…Amazonsmile Foundation
Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA7.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · 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 Joanne Bartholomay Jelke Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Joanne Bartholomay Jelke Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–60%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 Joanne Bartholomay Jelke Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Joanne Bartholomay Jelke 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 15 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 Joanne Bartholomay Jelke’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