· Private foundation
John & Mary Margaret Clay Foundatio
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 FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k13 grants · $32k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $52k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSTIY CHRISTIAN CHURCH | $42,100 |
| HYDE PARK SCHOOLS | $10,000 |
| GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION | $5,625 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| LOUISIANA TECH UNIVERSITY | $3,000 |
| COLLEGE OF WOOSTER | $3,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,500 |
| PRESYBETERIAN NIGHT SHELTER | $2,500 |
| JUNKET | $2,500 |
| CENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVES | $2,500 |
| FORT WORTH COUNTRY DAY | $2,000 |
| WOMENS CENTER | $1,000 |
| FIRST LIBERTY | $1,000 |
| JEWEL CHARITY | $1,000 |
| MEMORIALS | $500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $23k) 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 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.
22 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 7 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, 69% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27k 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
- YLYOUNG LIFE5× · 2019–2023 · $9k · revenue +38%
- FLFIRST LIBERTY INSTITUTE6× · 2019–2025 · $7k · revenue +98%
- JIJUNKET INC3× · 2022–2025 · $6k · revenue +158%
Funded once
- LTLA TECH UNIVERSITY -13one grant, 2021 · $67k
- CTCENTRAL TABLE OF GRACEone grant, 2022 · $5k
- TVTHE V FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +61%
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.
Texas wesleyan university, guided by its deep methodist heritage, provides transformational learning experiences and research opportunities to a diverse group of students to develop their full potential as individuals and as members of the…
Tricity family services (tcfs) is an illinois not-for-profit service agency serving the community members and organizations of central kane county. the agency is dedicated to strengthening people and building community through the…
Cca's mission is to assist family successes through excellence in comprehensive early education and development services.
To bring collaborative, systemic change for students in order to improve overall quality of life and to position tarrant county as a leading producer of high-quality talent.
Founded in 1886, thompson child & family focus is called to strengthen children, families, and communitiesdelivering measurable outcomes through healing, teaching, worship, and play. for more than a century, thompson has transformed lives…
To provide safe homes, education and counseling to vulnerable children and families. the program philosophy reinforces personal responsibility and emphasizes the need for a strong family unit.
Our mission is to provide quality mental health services to children and adults in low income families who are impacted by severe and persistent mental illness, emotional disturbances, child abuse and neglect, high-risk behaviors and…
Youth and family alliance (dba lifeworks) is a fearless advocate for youth and young adults pursuing a life they love and a stable future for themselves and their families. we strive to break cycles of instability by providing support and…
Our mission is to empower young women and men to make a positive decision about their unplanned pregnancy.
Improve lives by providing trauma-responsive foster care, adoption, and behavioral health services that promote permanency, safety, and well-being for youth and families.
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.
As a nonprofit leader, uwtc mobilizes our community to action so all can thrive. we identify critical needs, foster collaboration and invest in solutions that drive change. our programs serve nearly 400,000 people each year.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Women's Center of Tarrant County Inc and the most unlike its peers is Shady Oaks 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.
15 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. 15 of the 60 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 THE GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION ↗
- Who funds THE GLADNEY FUND ↗
- Who funds YOUNG LIFE ↗
- Who funds FIRST LIBERTY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds JUNKET INC ↗
- Who funds THE V FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HOPE FARM INC ↗
- Who funds THE COLLEGE OF WOOSTER ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVES ↗
- Who funds DRESS FOR SUCCESS WORLDWIDE ↗
- Who funds THE WOMEN'S CENTER OF TARRANT COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds Tarrant Area Food Bank ↗
- Who funds Shady Oaks 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.
Open a dossier: Garvey Texas Foundation Inc · Robert D and Catherine R Alexander Foundation · Carol J and R Denny Alexander Foundation · Paul E Andrews Jr Foundation · The Roach Foundation Inc · Amon G Carter Foundation · Sid W Richardson Foundation · Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 John & Mary Margaret Clay Foundatio 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 John & Mary Margaret Clay Foundatio?
Find your warmest path to John & Mary Margaret Clay Foundatio 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.