· Private foundation
Judy Calder Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
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 $10k18 grants · $89k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $255k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Texas Tech University | $150,000 |
| Texas A&M Foundation | $105,000 |
| Kendall County Youth Agriculture & Equestrian Center | $6,125 |
| Hill Country Youth Ranch | $5,000 |
| Upward Transitions Therapeutic Horsemanship | $5,000 |
| Hill Country Horse Rescue | $5,000 |
| Triple Me Mac Equine Sanctuary | $5,000 |
| Wings and Reins Equine Refuge | $5,000 |
| Wings and Reins Equine Refuge | $5,000 |
| Dream Walkers Equine Therapy Center | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| Tracys Paws Rescue | $5,000 |
| Triple H Equitherapy Center | $5,000 |
| Kendall County Jr Livestock Association | $5,000 |
| Hill Country Animal League | $5,000 |
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 (FY18–25, $242k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +41% since the first grant, against +15% for the ones you funded once.
22 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 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, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
- TATexas A&M Foundation9× · 2017–2025 · $963k · revenue +90%
- TTTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC2× · 2019–2020 · $125k · revenue +20%
- THTransformation House2× · 2020–2021 · $125k · revenue +186%
Funded once
- HCHILL COUNTRY FAMILY SERVICES INCone grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue +18%
- HCHILL COUNTRY DAILY BREADone grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue -8%
- HCHILL COUNTRY SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALSone grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +15%
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.
501c3 horse rescue
Prevent cruelty to animals.
Happy Trails Horse Rescue, located in Bend, Oregon, is dedicated to the protection of horses and their quality of life, to be free from abuse, neglect, abandonment, slaughter, or early euthanasia without just cause. While we strive to…
Sanctuary for abused or abandoned animals
South texas equine sanctuary provides rehabilitation and sanctuary to horses at risk.
Animal Rescue
Hooved Animal Rescue
Rescue and sanctuary for horses, donkeys, and mules.
To provide safe and experienced care and shelter for neglected, abused and/or abandoned horses.
The RERIDE Quarter Horse Adoption Program offers a safe haven for displaced or unwanted registered Quarter and Paint horses Our program focuses on rehabilitation retraining and adopting horses into qualified loving homes.
To rescue, rehabilitate, and re-home god's neglected or abused equine through programs of shelter, adoption, education, and assistance.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hill Country Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the most unlike its peers is Upward Transitions Therapeutic Horsemanship. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 25 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
20 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. 20 of the 27 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 A&M Foundation ↗
- Who funds TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Transformation House ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY YOUTH RANCH ↗
- Who funds KENDALL COUNTY YOUTH AGRICULTURE AND EQUESTRIAN CENTER ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY ANIMAL LEAGUE SPCA INC ↗
- Who funds Triple H Equitherapy Center ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY YOUTH ORCHESTRAS INC ↗
- Who funds Hay Dude Critter Rescue ↗
- Who funds BRIGHTER DAYS HORSE REFUGE INC ↗
- Who funds Upward Transitions Therapeutic Horsemanship ↗
- Who funds WILDLIFE RESCUE AND REHABILITATION INC ↗
- Who funds Triple Me Mac Equine Sanctuary ↗
- Who funds HAPPENED BY CHANCE HORSES INC ↗
- Who funds BLUEBONNET EQUINE HUMANE SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds TRACYSPAWSRESCUE ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY DAILY BREAD ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗
- Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO (AUDIT) ↗
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: San Antonio Area Foundation · Faye L & William L Cowden Charitable Foundation · Perry & Ruby Stevens Charitable Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · The Robert P and Mariana R Scripps Family Foundation Inc · Amy Shelton McNutt Charitable Trust · Harvey E Najim Charitable Foundation · The Community Foundation of the Texas Hill Country Inc · Floyd a & Kathleen C Cailloux Foundation · Hal & Charlie Peterson Foundation & Fd Mgmt Trust · Miramar Charitable Foundation · Carl C Anderson Sr and Marie Jo Anderson Charitable 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 Judy Calder 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 Judy Calder Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Judy Calder 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.