· Private foundation
John Henry Dean III and Shirley Lawson Dean 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 clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k11 grants · $32k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $74k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $105k
- $250k+2 grants · $4.5M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BAYLOR SCOTT & WHITE ALL SAINTS HEALTH FOUNDATION | $2,460,200 |
| COOK CHILDRENS MEDICAL CENTER | $2,005,000 |
| SAVING HOPE ANIMAL RESCUE | $105,000 |
| ARIZONA HUMANE SOCIETY | $44,145 |
| FORT WORTH DELTA DELTA DELTA ALUMNAE CHARITIES | $10,300 |
| AMERICAN RED CROSS | $10,000 |
| CHILDHELP INC | $10,000 |
| TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| FORT WORTH MUSEUM OF SCIENCE AND HISTORY | $5,000 |
| AIRPOWER FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| JEWEL CHARITY BALL INCORPORATED | $5,000 |
| HOLIDAYS & HEROES | $3,000 |
| LES DAMES DASPEN LTD | $2,500 |
| UNION GOSPEL MISSION | $2,000 |
| TARRANT AREA FOOD BANK | $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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $321k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 97% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +31% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.
34 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- CCCook Children's Medical Center9× · 2017–2025 · $8.7M · revenue +118%
- AHArizona Humane Society8× · 2017–2025 · $154k · revenue +137%
- ANAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches9× · 2017–2025 · $105k · revenue +46%
Funded once
- CFCENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVESone grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +4%
- NMNATIONAL MOUNTED WARFARE FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue +156%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $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.
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
With more than 1 million patient visits each year, Children's Health is North Texas' leading pediatric health system and among the largest in the nation. For more than a century, our mission has been clear: make life better for children.…
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
To foster and support the activities and purposes of Baylor Scott & White Health, to encourage broad-based public support of the health care system and its affiliated institutions, and to advance the medical objectives, including…
To improve the care and well being of our community, nationally and internationally, through innovative clinically relevant research that is consistent with the mission, vision and values of Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH).
The mission of the Dallas-Fort Worth Hospital Council is to drive evidence-based improvement in patient care and health equity throughout the region.
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.
To foster and support the activities and purposes of Baylor Scott & White All Saints Medical Center-Fort Worth, to encourage broad-based public support, and to advance medical objectives, including sponsorship or patient care, research,…
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewel Charity Ball Incorporated and the most unlike its peers is Beautiful Feet Ministries. 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.
Your grantees are a median of 41 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
47 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. 47 of the 61 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 Cook Children's Medical Center ↗
- Who funds FORT WORTH MUSEUM OF SCIENCE AND HISTORY ↗
- Who funds SAVING HOPE ANIMAL RESCUE FUND ↗
- Who funds Arizona Humane Society ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVES ↗
- Who funds Texas Health Resources Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE FORT WORTH ZOOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds JEWEL CHARITY BALL INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds CHILDHELP INC ↗
- Who funds Fort Worth Delta Delta Delta Alumnae Charities ↗
- Who funds FORT WORTH HOPE CENTER THE HOPE CENTER ↗
- Who funds Fort Worth Airpower Foundation ↗
- Who funds HONORHEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Phoenix Children's Hospital ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL MOUNTED WARFARE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds CAMP FIRE FIRST TEXAS ↗
- Who funds Fort Worth Garden Club Inc ↗
- Who funds HOLIDAYS & HEROES ↗
- Who funds DREAM PARK ↗
- Who funds Les Dames D'Aspen LTD ↗
- Who funds USS FORT WORTH (LCS-3) SUPPORT COMMITTEE INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS BALLET THEATER INC ↗
- Who funds BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Tarrant Area Food Bank ↗
- Who funds Trashmasters International Inc ↗
- Who funds GUIDING EYES FOR THE BLIND INC ↗
- Who funds Response - Help for Survivors of Domestic Violence & Sexual Assault ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED 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: Thomas M Helen McKee & John P Ryan Fo John P Ryan Foundation Inc · Garvey Texas Foundation Inc · Bnsf Railway Foundation · Sid W Richardson Foundation · The Roach Foundation Inc · Amon G Carter Foundation · Virginia Hobbs Charitable Trust Simmons Bank Trustee · Leo Potishman Foundation Xxxxx3002 · Amon G Carter-Star Tele Emply Fund · Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353 · Winn-Dunaway Family 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 John Henry Dean III and Shirley Lawson Dean 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 John Henry Dean III and Shirley Lawson Dean Foundation?
Find your warmest path to John Henry Dean III and Shirley Lawson Dean 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.