Skip to content

· Private foundation

Marshall and Ellen Peters Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$49k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$6k
Largest
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 2025.

Health$108kHuman Services$87kCrime & Legal$52kReligion$48kYouth Development$43kHousing & Shelter$29kFood & Nutrition$11kPhilanthropy$2k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$789k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
VOICES FOR CHILDREN INC$6,000
BRAZOS VALLEY REHABILITATION CENTER INC$6,000
FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF BRYAN$5,000
HOSPICE BRAZOS VALLEY INC$5,000
TWIN CITY MISSION$5,000
HEALTH FOR ALL CLINIC INC$5,000
METHODIST RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES$5,000
BOYS CLUBS OF BRAZOS COUNTY INC$5,000
SCOTTYS HOUSE BRAZOS VALLEY CHILD ADVOCA$4,000
BRAZOS VALLEY FOOD BANK INC$2,500
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 (FY17–25, $88k) land where the poverty rate runs at 22%, against an area that typically sits at 19%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 19%VOICES FOR CHILDREN INC: $6k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $5k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $5k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $5k → 22%HOSPICE BRAZOS VALLEY INC: $5k → 22%HOSPICE BRAZOS VALLEY INC: $5k → 22%HOSPICE BRAZOS VALLEY INC: $5k → 22%HOSPICE BRAZOS VALLEY INC: $5k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $5k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $5k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $5k → 22%HOSPICE BRAZOS VALLEY INC: $5k → 22%HOSPICE BRAZOS VALLEY INC: $5k → 22%HOSPICE BRAZOS VALLEY INC: $5k → 22%HOSPICE BRAZOS VALLEY INC: $5k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN INC: $4k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN INC: $4k → 22%HOSPICE BRAZOS VALLEY INC: $4k → 22%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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$364k · 14 repeat orgs$13k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +33% since the first grant, against -24% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
2

Total granted

$364k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
-24%

Still filing today

64%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesReligionYouth DevelopmentFood & NutritionOther
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

  • VF
    Voices for Children Inc
    9× · 2017–2025 · $44k · revenue +77%
  • TC
    Twin City Mission
    9× · 2017–2025 · $43k · revenue +35%
  • SO
    S O S Ministries INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $29k · revenue +91%

Funded once

  • SO
    S O S MINISTRIES INC
    one grant, 2023 · $4k · revenue -24%
  • SH
    SCOTTY'S HOUSE BRAZOS VALLEY CHILD
    one grant, 2024 · $4k
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
Brazos Valley Council on Alcohol and Substance Abuse

To provide guidance and support for persons affected by alcohol and substance abuse.

Health
2
Brazos Valley Affordable Housing Corporation

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…

Community Improvement
3
Casa of South Texas Inc

Child Advocacy

Human Services
4
Brazos Employment Enterprises Dba the Bee Community

To provide community, life-long learning, and meaningful work for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

—
5
Womens Center of Brazoria County Inc

Comprehensive service to domestic violence and sexual assault victims

Human Services
6
Casa of the Brazos Valley Foundation

To provide financial support for the charitable programs and activities of Voices for Children, Inc. a nonprofit corporation 501(c)(3) that provides advocacy services to children in the child welfare system due to abuse and/or neglect.

Philanthropy
7
United Way of Brazoria County

To educate, unite and focus our community's resources in order to efficiently address the most critical needs of Brazoria County

Philanthropy
8
Brazoria County Dream Center Inc

The Brazoria County Dream Center BCDC provides avenues of healing to the souls of hurting humanity in Brazoria County, TX. We address both the physical and emotional needs of the community. We accomplish this by focusing on rebuilding…

Human Services
9
Brazos Valley Cdc Inc

To provide quality services and products to the residents and businesses of our communities 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…

Housing & Shelter
10
Ft Bend County Child Advocates Inc

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.

Civil Rights
11
Starr of Hope

The mission of STARR of Hope, in collaboration with the community resources, is to provide prevention, intervention, and advocacy for women and children who experience domestic abuse or violence in Starr, Zapata and Jim Hogg Counties.

Housing & Shelter
12
Bluebonnet Childrens Center

To protect and enhance the quality of life for abused and neglected children in Medina, Real and Uvalde Counties of Texas.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Voices for Children Inc; the most unlike its peers is S O S Ministries Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

11 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. 11 of the 18 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Twin City Mission: $43,000 · OtherTwin City MissionFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $29,100 · OtherFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCHSCOTTY'S HOUSE: $29,000 · OtherSCOTTY'S HOUSETHE SALVATION ARMY BCS: $27,000 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMY BCSFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF BRYAN: $15,000 · OtherFIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF BRYANTHE SALVATION ARMY: $8,000 · Other+2 more: $9,000 · Other+2 moreVoices for Children Inc: $44,000 · Human ServicesVoices for Children IncHospice Brazos Valley Inc: $43,750 · Human ServicesHospice Brazos Valley IncHealth for All Inc: $45,000 · HealthHealth for All IncBRAZOS VALLEY REHABILITATION CENTER: $18,945 · HealthBRAZOS VALLEY REHABIL…Scottys House Brazos Valley Child Advocacy Center Inc: $8,000 · HealthScottys House Brazos …S O S Ministries INC: $29,000 · ReligionS O S Min…S O S MINISTRIES INC: $4,000 · ReligionS O S MIN…Boys Club of Brazos County Inc: $13,500 · Youth DevelopmentBRAZOS VALLEY FOOD BANK INC: $10,750 · Food & NutritionCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE BRAZOS VALLEY: $2,000 · Philanthropy
Other$160,100Human Services$87,750Health$71,945Religion$33,000Youth Development$13,500Food & Nutrition$10,750Philanthropy$2,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHealth for All Inc: $45,000 over 9y, 0.8% of budgetVoices for Children Inc: $44,000 over 9y, 0.9% of budgetHospice Brazos Valley Inc: $43,750 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetTwin City Mission: $43,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetS O S Ministries INC: $29,000 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetBRAZOS VALLEY REHABILITATION CENTER: $18,945 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetBoys Club of Brazos County Inc: $13,500 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetBRAZOS VALLEY FOOD BANK INC: $10,750 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetScottys House Brazos Valley Child Advocacy Center Inc: $8,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetS O S MINISTRIES INC: $4,000 over 1y, 1.0% 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.

  • Who funds Health for All Inc ↗
  • Who funds Voices for Children Inc ↗
  • Who funds Hospice Brazos Valley Inc ↗
  • Who funds Twin City Mission ↗
  • Who funds S O S Ministries INC ↗
  • Who funds BRAZOS VALLEY REHABILITATION CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Boys Club of Brazos County Inc ↗
  • Who funds BRAZOS VALLEY FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds Scottys House Brazos Valley Child Advocacy Center Inc ↗
  • Who funds S O S MINISTRIES INC ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE BRAZOS VALLEY ↗

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.

M Bookman Peters Charitable FoundationMO26.4× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: M Bookman Peters Charitable Foundation · Nina Heard Astin Charitable Trust · Edge Eugene III Charitable Trust · Gilbert & Thyra Plass Charitable Trust · Orr Waldon H and Adele Charitable Trust · Lucille and John B Dougherty Trust · Winkler Nina Astin Trust · Mervin and Annete Peters Family Foundation · Virginia & Christian Groneman Charitable · Orr James Donald Charitable Trust · United Way of the Brazos Valley · Clifton C & Henrietta C Doak Charitable

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 Marshall and Ellen Peters Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Marshall and Ellen Peters Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 Marshall and Ellen Peters Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Marshall and Ellen Peters Family 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.

    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 18 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Marshall and Ellen Peters Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph