· Private foundation
Max and Minnie Tomerlin Voelcker Fund
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 FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k2 grants · $5k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $60k
- $50k–250k15 grants · $1.8M
- $250k+5 grants · $1.6M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CHRISTUS CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF SAN ANTONIO | $500,000 |
| TRINITY UNIVERSITY | $289,994 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER | $287,340 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO | $250,880 |
| HARDBERGER PARK CONSERVANCY | $250,000 |
| BOYSVILLE INC | $180,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO | $150,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO | $150,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO | $150,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO | $150,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO | $150,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO | $150,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO | $116,666 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO | $116,666 |
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT SAN ANTONIO | $116,666 |
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 (FY19–25, $1.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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 +47% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
17 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 4 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, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $810k 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
- BIBOYSVILLE INC7× · 2019–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +9%
- ICI CARE SAN ANTONIO INC7× · 2019–2025 · $415k · revenue +84%
- RFRETINA FOUNDATION OF THE SOUTHWEST5× · 2019–2025 · $315k · revenue +47%
Funded once
- TBTEXAS BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTEone grant, 2024 · $350k · revenue 0%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER - 2019 YOUNG INVESTIGATOR AWARDone grant, 2021 · $267k
- UOUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER - 2021 YOUNG INVESTIGATOR AWARDone grant, 2021 · $233k
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 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).
To further the conservation, improvement and restoration of human eyesight" (mrs. doheny - 1947).
The hugo w. moser research institute at kennedy krieger, inc. (the "research institute") is an internationally recognized research facility finding answers to problems and injuries that affect a child's developing brain. researchers have…
The mission of Texas Heart Institute (THI) is to reduce the devastating toll of cardiovascular disease through innovative and progressive programs in research, education, and improved patient care.
Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…
Please see schedule o
Brightfocus foundation funds exceptional research worldwide to defeat alzheimer's disease, macular degeneration, and glaucoma and provides expert information on these heartbreaking diseases. please refer to schedule o for a complete…
As a leading academic healthcare organization, our mission is to elevate the health status of the communities we serve.(see schedule o for continuation)(continued)-we deliver exceptional healthcare enhanced by research and education-we…
Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.
The mission of the texas healthcare and bioscience institute is to research, develop, and advocate policies and actions that promote biomedical science, biotechnology, agriculture and medical device innovation in texas.
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 Retina Foundation of the Southwest and the most unlike its peers is Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute for Texas. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 35 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 BOYSVILLE INC ↗
- Who funds THE FOUNDATION FIGHTING BLINDNESS INC ↗
- Who funds I CARE SAN ANTONIO INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds RETINA FOUNDATION OF THE SOUTHWEST ↗
- Who funds Trinity University ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds PHIL HARDBERGER PARK CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds AUGUSTHEART ↗
- Who funds BRIGHTON CENTER ↗
- Who funds SAN ANTONIO YOUNG WOMEN'S LEADERSHIP ACADEMY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LOW VISION RESOURCE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds MEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE FOR TEXAS ↗
- Who funds BELIEVE IT FOUNDATION ↗
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 · Betty Stieren Kelso Foundation · Nancy Smith Hurd Foundation · Faye L & William L Cowden Charitable Foundation · Harvey E Najim Charitable Foundation · The Charity Ball Association of San Antonio Inc · The Texas Cavaliers Charitable Foundation · The Dixie Starnes Wenger Foundation · Mays Family Foundation · Pryor Myra Stafford Char Tr F0030100 · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc
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 Max and Minnie Tomerlin Voelcker Fund 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 Max and Minnie Tomerlin Voelcker Fund?
Find your warmest path to Max and Minnie Tomerlin Voelcker Fund 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.