Skip to content
Kershaw's Challenge at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Kershaw's Challenge

KERSHAW'S CHALLENGE mission is to provide funds and other assistance to build schools and orphanages in the town of lusaka in the country of zambia and to provide support for other organizations in the united states.

$2.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$320k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

International$8.3MHuman Services$2.5MHealth$1.6MYouth Development$1.1MEducation$970kRecreation & Sports$800kHousing & Shelter$558kCrime & Legal$150kOther$0
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k8 grants · $1.3M
  • $250k+3 grants · $915k
$175,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$419k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BOTH ENDS BELIEVING$320,000
INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION$320,000
DREAM CENTER$275,000
BONTON FARMS$220,000
ARISE AFRICA$200,000
ACTION IN AFRICA$175,000
FOR THE NATIONS$160,000
LOS ANGELES DODGERS FOUNDATION$150,000
FOR OAK CLIFF$150,000
HOPE WALKS$130,000
SHOES THAT FIT$100,000
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 (FY17–24, $7.7M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 73% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BOTH ENDS BELIEVING: $425k → 5%BEHIND EVERY DOOR: $450k → 14%BOTH ENDS BELIEVING: $400k → 5%BEHIND EVERY DOOR: $418k → 14%BOTH ENDS BELIEVING: $350k → 5%BEHIND EVERY DOOR: $303k → 14%BOTH ENDS BELIEVING: $325k → 5%BEHIND EVERY DOOR: $300k → 14%BOTH ENDS BELIEVING: $320k → 5%BOTH ENDS BELIEVING: $275k → 5%DREAM CENTER: $333k → 14%DREAM CENTER: $315k → 14%INTERFAITH FAMILIES: $340k → 14%DREAM CENTER: $300k → 14%DREAM CENTER: $275k → 14%DREAM CENTER: $235k → 14%FOR OAK CLIFF: $400k → 14%DREAM CENTER: $200k → 14%FOR OAK CLIFF: $150k → 14%DREAM CENTER: $160k → 14%FOR OAK CLIFF: $150k → 14%DREAM CENTER: $68k → 14%CONNECTING POINT: $250k → 14%SHOES THAT FIT: $330k → 14%SHOES THAT FIT: $325k → 14%SHOES THAT FIT: $240k → 14%SHOES THAT FIT: $100k → 14%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 33% of Kershaw's Challenge’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 57% of the giving stays in TX; by stated purpose, 40%.

Kershaw's Challengelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 33% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$14M · 12 repeat orgs$1.7M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +88% since the first grant, against -10% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
6

Total granted

$14M
$1.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+88%
-10%

Still filing today

100%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $175k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesInternationalEducationPhilanthropyRecreation & SportsCrime & LegalOther
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

  • AA
    ARISE AFRICA INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.8M · revenue +244% · 31% of their budget
  • IJ
    INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION
    7× · 2018–2024 · $2.2M · revenue +88%
  • BE
    BOTH ENDS BELIEVING INC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $2.1M · revenue +266% · 29% of their budget

Funded once

  • IF
    INTERFAITH FAMILY SERVICES
    one grant, 2018 · $340k · revenue -10%
  • CURE INTERNATIONAL INC
    one grant, 2017 · $333k · revenue +4%
  • CP
    CONNECTING POINT OF PARK CITIESgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $250k · revenue +88% · 61% of their budget
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
Inclusive Development International

Inclusive Development International supports communities around the world to defend their rights and resources in the face of harmful corporate activities and internationally financed development projects, and we advocate for a more just…

International
2
Dallas International University

As a christian university, we provide education and research opportunities preparing global leaders to partner with local communities.

Education
3
Bless the Children Ministries Inc

To be the love of christ to uganda's orphaned and vulnerable children, equipping them to become authentic godly leaders that transform generations

International
4
Compassion International Incorporated

Compassion exists to release children from poverty in Jesus' name. Compassion serves all children, regardless of religion, race, ethnicity, or gender.

International
5
Christianity Today International

Christianity Today is a global community inspired by evangelical conviction to advance the stories and ideas of the kingdom of God. Our mission is to elevate the storytellers and sages of the global church.

Religion
6
Childrens House International

Children's house international provides ethical adoption services, child focused recruitment, and family support. we support disadvantaged children with humanitarian aid in countries worldwide.

—
7
Onechild Global

One child global's mission is to advocate for children in hard places and provide holistic care so they have hope and thrive. onechild global's 355 hope centers provide holistic child development progress in nineteen countries.

International
8
Firelight Foundation

Firelight supports catalytic community-based organizations in eastern and southern africa that work with their own communities to realize shared visions of sustainable change and true potential for children and youth.

International
9
Youth for Christ International Ministries

As part of the body of christ, to see that every young person in every people group in every nation has the opportunity to make an informed decision to be a follower of jesus christ and become a part of the local church.

Religion
10
Biglife International Inc

Biglife international inc. empowers believers worldwide to reach and disciple their own people for jesus christ.

Recreation & Sports
11
Opportunity Transformation Investments Inc

To invest in and hold ownership positions in micro-finance institutions serving the poor.

Community Improvement
12
Next Worldwide Inc

With a desire to see the Gospel proclaimed in all nations, we exist to make and multiply disciples of the next generation through the vehicles of church-planting missions and missional leadership training.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Both Ends Believing Inc; the most unlike its peers is Connecting Point of Park Cities. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

18 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. 18 of the 19 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
13/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BOTH ENDS BELIEVING INC: $2,095,000 · Human ServicesBOTH ENDS BELIEVING INCDREAM CENTER FOUNDATION: $1,885,267 · Human ServicesDREAM CENTER FOUNDATIONBEHIND EVERY DOOR MINISTRIES INC: $1,470,268 · Human ServicesBEHIND EVERY DOOR MINISTRIES INCSHOES THAT FIT: $995,113 · Human ServicesSHOES THAT FITFOR OAK CLIFF: $700,000 · Human ServicesFOR OAK CLIFFINTERFAITH FAMILY SERVICES: $340,000 · Human Services+1 more: $250,000 · Human ServicesARISE AFRICA INC: $2,773,000 · InternationalARISE AFRICA INCINTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION: $2,245,000 · InternationalINTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSIONFor the Nations Refugee Outreach: $410,000 · InternationalFor the Nations Refugee OutreachCURE INTERNATIONAL INC: $332,500 · InternationalCURE INTERNATIONAL INCHOPE WALKS INC: $290,000 · International+1 more: $175,000 · InternationalTHE LOS ANGELES DODGERS FOUNDATION: $800,000 · Recreation & SportsBONTON ENTERPRISES: $520,000 · EducationWEST DALLAS COMMUNITY SCHOOL FOUNDATION: $200,000 · EducationOUR CALLING: $225,000 · OtherNEW FRIENDS NEW LIFE: $150,000 · Crime & LegalJUST KEEP LIVIN FOUNDATION: $60,000 · Philanthropy
Human Services$7,735,648International$6,225,500Recreation & Sports$800,000Education$720,000Other$225,000Crime & Legal$150,000Philanthropy$60,000

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 budgetARISE AFRICA INC: $2,773,000 over 8y, 31% of budgetINTERNATIONAL JUSTICE MISSION: $2,245,000 over 7y, 1.1% of budgetBOTH ENDS BELIEVING INC: $2,095,000 over 6y, 29% of budgetDREAM CENTER FOUNDATION: $1,885,267 over 8y, 1.5% of budgetBEHIND EVERY DOOR MINISTRIES INC: $1,470,268 over 4y, 30% of budgetSHOES THAT FIT: $995,113 over 4y, 11% of budgetTHE LOS ANGELES DODGERS FOUNDATION: $800,000 over 4y, 3.5% of budgetFOR OAK CLIFF: $700,000 over 3y, 13% of budgetBONTON ENTERPRISES: $520,000 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetFor the Nations Refugee Outreach: $410,000 over 2y, 7.2% of budgetINTERFAITH FAMILY SERVICES: $340,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetCURE INTERNATIONAL INC: $332,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetHOPE WALKS INC: $290,000 over 2y, 4.3% of budgetCONNECTING POINT OF PARK CITIES: $250,000 over 1y, 61% of budgetWEST DALLAS COMMUNITY SCHOOL FOUNDATION: $200,000 over 1y, 84% of budgetACTION IN AFRICA INC: $175,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetNEW FRIENDS NEW LIFE: $150,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetJUST KEEP LIVIN FOUNDATION: $60,000 over 2y, 1.1% 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.

Kershaw FoundationCommunities Foundatio…The Dallas FoundationThe Rees-Jones Founda…Texas Instruments Fou…Dallas Alumnae Associ…Prairie Creek Partner…Katherine C Carmody C…Hillcrest FoundationThe Moody FoundationCharities Aid Foundat…National Philanthropi…
Kershaw FoundationTX22.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Kershaw Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · The Dallas Foundation · The Rees-Jones Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · Dallas Alumnae Association of Kappa Kappa Gamma Foundation Inc · Prairie Creek Partners Charitable Foundation · Katherine C Carmody Charitable Tuw · Hillcrest Foundation · The Moody Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Kershaw's Challenge funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Kershaw's Challenge. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    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 Kershaw's Challenge?

    Find your warmest path to Kershaw's Challenge 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 19 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 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 Kershaw's Challenge’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