· Private foundation
John B and Ethel Templeton Fund
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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DELL CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| OUT YOUTH INC | $5,000 |
| FRIEDREICH'S ATAXIA RESEARCH ALLIAN | $5,000 |
| NAMI CENTRAL TEXAS | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| CENTRAL TEXAS FOOD BANK | $3,594 |
| DOWN HOME RANCH | $2,500 |
| POP UP BIRTHDAY FOUNDATION | $2,500 |
| AUSTIN DIAPER BANK | $2,500 |
| THE BAKARI FOUNDATION | $2,500 |
| CANINE COMPANIONS | $2,500 |
| AUSTIN CLUBHOUSE | $2,500 |
| ROUND ROCK AREA SERVING CENTER | $2,500 |
| RUTLEDGE CANCER FOUNDATION | $2,500 |
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 (FY17–25, $45k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +10% since the first grant, against -4% for the ones you funded once.
21 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 9 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, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k 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
- HHHELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN INC6× · 2017–2023 · $27k · revenue +62%
- OYOut Youth Inc4× · 2022–2025 · $20k · revenue +70%
- FAFRIEDREICH'S ATAXIA RESEARCH ALLIANCE4× · 2022–2025 · $18k · revenue +19%
Funded once
- TATHE AUSTIN CENTER FOR GRIEF AND LOSSone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue -53%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2019 · $7k
- BCBEE CAVE RECOVERYone grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue -1%
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.
RAISE Texas advances equitable policies and programs that foster financial security and economic mobility for low- and moderate-income Texans. We equip, innovate and advocate to reduce disparities, remove barriers and build opportunities…
ATX Helps was created to fill gaps in the spectrum of services available to people in Austin who are experiencing homelessness.
Unbound North Texas exists to support survivors and resource the community to fight human trafficking through Survivor Advocacy, a 24/7 Drop-In Center, and Prevention and Awareness.
To improve the mental health of children and their families through early intervention, diagnosis, and treatment to help them develop the emotional skills for meeting life's challenges.
Young Texans Against Cancer is a network of motivated young professionals collectively working together to raise awareness and funds to support the local Dallas cancer community. The Dallas chapter was established in 2007, as part of a…
Any baby can, an austin-based nonprofit, partners with parents so children reach their full potential. with programs that meet clients where they are at home, work or school any baby can provides in-home therapy, parent education, mental…
The ACLU Foundation of Texas is the unyielding guardian and promoter of freedom, justice, equality and dignity of all people, particularly for those who are still fighting to secure the full exercise of their civil rights and liberties.…
To engage and educate communities to prevent sexual violence and to support survivors and their loved ones as they heal and thrive.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dell Children's Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Moss Pieratt Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
25 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. 25 of the 35 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 HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
- Who funds Out Youth Inc ↗
- Who funds FRIEDREICH'S ATAXIA RESEARCH ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds RUTLEDGE CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NAMI Central Texas ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN PARKS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE BAKARI FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE AUSTIN CENTER FOR GRIEF AND LOSS ↗
- Who funds THE SAFE ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Round Rock Area Serving Center Inc ↗
- Who funds Pop-Up Birthday Foundation ↗
- Who funds Austin Clubhouse Inc ↗
- Who funds Central Texas Food Bank Inc ↗
- Who funds BEE CAVE RECOVERY ↗
- Who funds DELL CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN DIAPER BANK ↗
- Who funds DOWN HOME RANCH INC ↗
- Who funds IDEA Public Schools ↗
- Who funds EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY SUPPORT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS 4000 FOR CANCER ↗
- Who funds Moss Pieratt Foundation ↗
- Who funds SHADE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds Mother Maryam 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 · The Moody Foundation · St David's Foundation · Better Business Bureau · United Way for Greater Austin · Joni Elaine Templeton Charitable Foundation · Ecg Foundation · Shield-Ayres Foundation · Charles Schwab Foundation · Aetna Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · United Way Worldwide
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 B and Ethel Templeton Fund 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 B and Ethel Templeton Fund?
Find your warmest path to John B and Ethel Templeton Fund 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.