· Private foundation
M Bookman Peters Charitable 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 $10k11 grants · $55k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BRYAN ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| TWIN CITY MISSION | $7,500 |
| BRAZOS VALLEY FOOD BANK INC | $6,800 |
| PRESBYTERIAN MO-RANCH ASSEMBLY | $5,000 |
| BRAZOS VALLEY MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY | $5,000 |
| BOYS CLUBS OF BRAZOS COUNTY INC | $5,000 |
| HEALTH FOR ALL CLINIC INC | $5,000 |
| HOSPICE BRAZOS VALLEY INC | $5,000 |
| VOICES FOR CHILDREN INC | $4,000 |
| THE SALVATION ARMY | $4,000 |
| SCOTTYS HOUSE BRAZOS VALLEY CHILD ADVOCA | $4,000 |
| BRAZOS VALLEY REHABILITATION CENTER INC | $4,000 |
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, $78k) land where the poverty rate runs at 21%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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 +35% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
17 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2025, 6 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, 92% 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
- BIBryan ISD Education Foundation8× · 2018–2025 · $75k · revenue +90%
- TCTwin City Mission9× · 2017–2025 · $60k · revenue +35%
- VFVoices for Children Inc8× · 2017–2025 · $31k · revenue +77%
Funded once
- BSBRYAN-COLLEGE STATION HABITAT FOR HUMANIgraduatedone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue +29%
- PCPRESBYTERIAN CHILDREN'S HOMES & SERVICESone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue 0%
- GSGIRL SCOUTS OF CENTRAL TEXASone grant, 2017 · $4k · revenue -9%
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.
To provide guidance and support for persons affected by alcohol and substance abuse.
To provide quality services and products to the residents and businesses of our community in such a way as to maximize the affordability of safe and decent housing, especially for the low income; and to serve as a vehicle and assist in any…
Child Advocacy
To educate, unite and focus our community's resources in order to efficiently address the most critical needs of Brazoria County
To provide community, life-long learning, and meaningful work for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
To assist homeless families in securing stable housing
The children's advocacy center of van zandt county is committed to ensuring quality services and support to those children impacted by abuse while also building a future where no child in van zandt county experiences abuse.
To provide family services and to provide residential child care for dependent children where there is a need to assist children and families disrupted by problems.
Fort Bend County Child Advocates, Inc. provides a voice, heals the hurt and breaks the cycle of abuse and neglect for children in Fort Bend County.
Lone Star CASA elevates the voices of children in Kaufman and Rockwall County who have experienced abuse and neglect by providing trained volunteer advocates to work alongside children and families so they can achieve safety and stability…
To recruit, train and supervise volunteers that advocate in the best interests of abused and neglected children in court.
To protect and enhance the quality of life for abused and neglected children in Medina, Real and Uvalde Counties of Texas.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Voices for Children Inc and the most unlike its peers is Bryan Isd Education Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
19 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. 19 of the 24 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 Bryan ISD Education Foundation ↗
- Who funds Twin City Mission ↗
- Who funds Health for All Inc ↗
- Who funds Hospice Brazos Valley Inc ↗
- Who funds Voices for Children Inc ↗
- Who funds BRAZOS VALLEY FOOD BANK INC ↗
- Who funds BRAZOS VALLEY REHABILITATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds Brazos Valley Museum of Natural History ↗
- Who funds Boys Club of Brazos County Inc ↗
- Who funds S O S Ministries INC ↗
- Who funds Texas A&M Foundation ↗
- Who funds Scottys House Brazos Valley Child Advocacy Center Inc ↗
- Who funds BRYAN-COLLEGE STATION HABITAT FOR HUMANI ↗
- Who funds PRESBYTERIAN CHILDREN'S HOMES & SERVICES ↗
- Who funds PRESBYTERIAN MO-RANCH ASSEMBLY ↗
- Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF CENTRAL TEXAS ↗
- Who funds VOICES FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds Unlimited Potential Inc ↗
- Who funds S O S MINISTRIES 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: Nina Heard Astin Charitable Trust · Edge Eugene III Charitable Trust · Orr Waldon H and Adele Charitable Trust · Winkler Nina Astin Trust · Gilbert & Thyra Plass Charitable Trust · Lucille and John B Dougherty Trust · Marshall and Ellen Peters Family Foundation · Mervin and Annete Peters Family Foundation · Orr James Donald Charitable Trust · Virginia & Christian Groneman Charitable · Orr Carl and Lena Charitable Trust · Clifton C & Henrietta C Doak Charitable
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 M Bookman Peters Charitable 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 M Bookman Peters Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to M Bookman Peters Charitable 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.