· Private foundation
McCallum Family Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
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 $10k44 grants · $121k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $187k
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC | $250,000 |
| HEALTHY AQUATICS MARINE INSTITUTE OF FLORIDA INC | $45,000 |
| CASA MANANA INC | $40,000 |
| BAY AREA LATINO LAWYERS FUND | $20,000 |
| DUKE UNIVERSITY | $15,000 |
| HEALTHY AQUATICS MARINE INSTITUTE OF FLORIDA INC | $15,000 |
| CASA MANANA INC | $12,000 |
| RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE OF FORT WORTH INC | $10,000 |
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INCORPORATED | $10,000 |
| SAMARITANS PURSE | $10,000 |
| CASA MANANA INC | $10,000 |
| RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE OF FORT WORTH INC | $8,000 |
| RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE OF FORT WORTH INC | $7,500 |
| VAN CLIBURN FOUNDATION INC | $7,500 |
| TARRANT AREA FOOD BANK | $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 (FY17–25, $46k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 98% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +43% since the first grant, against +31% for the ones you funded once.
59 repeat relationships — 34 still active in FY2025, 25 since wound down; 11 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; $42k 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
GEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC8× · 2017–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +116%- CMCASA MANANA INC9× · 2017–2025 · $638k · revenue +43%
- HAHEALTHY AQUATICS MARINE INSTITUTE OF FLORIDA INC9× · 2017–2025 · $243k · revenue +266%
Funded once
- GIGEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGYone grant, 2018 · $53k
- DFDALLAS FOUNDATION A TX NONPROFIT CORPORATIONone grant, 2023 · $10k
- FAF Archerone grant, 2022 · $7k
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.
The texas veterinary medical foundation is committed to supporting the veterinary profession and our communities in texas by providing resources, education, and programs for the responsible stewardship of animals.
To facilitate research and development within the texas a&m university system and selected other entities.
The mission of the Dallas-Fort Worth Hospital Council is to drive evidence-based improvement in patient care and health equity throughout the region.
To generate superior long-term investment returns to support The University of Texas and Texas A&M University systems as they provide world-class teaching, push the boundaries of discovery, and achieve excellence in patient healthcare for…
To fund neurofibromatosis research and education and to provide for support groups for those facing the illness.
Texas Parks and Wildlife Foundation (TPWF) is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization thatadvances Texas proud outdoor traditions through meaningful, high-impact programs,partnerships, and a wide range of projects that conserve and enhance our…
The mission of texas trees foundation is to improve the health of cities and people through the transformative power of trees.
To recognize the accomplishments and contributions of our outstanding Texas business leaders and to perpetuate and inspire the values of entrepreneurial spirit, personal integrity, and community leadership in all generations of Texans.
The forty first foundation supports and advances the university of texas at austin in its pursuit of excellence. we work closely with the office of the president to identify, fund, and implement strategic initiatives that enhance the…
The university of north texas foundation, inc. serves as unt's strategic partner in managing and growing private assets for support of the university's mission. untf's continuity, flexibility, and creative solutions contribute to fully…
National Christian Foundation North Texas (NCFNT) was created to facilitate smarter Christian giving with sophisticated charitable techniques.
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 Communities Foundation of Texas Inc and the most unlike its peers is A Memory Grows. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 37 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
90 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. 90 of the 120 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 GEORGIA TECH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CASA MANANA INC ↗
- Who funds HEALTHY AQUATICS MARINE INSTITUTE OF FLORIDA INC ↗
- Who funds RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE OF FORT WORTH INC ↗
- Who funds NATL CHRISTIAN CHARITABLE FDN INC ↗
- Who funds THE BEN HOGAN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds TRINITY VALLEY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds Abaco Rescue Fund Non-Profit Corporation ↗
- Who funds AMON CARTER MUSEUM OF WESTERN ART ↗
- Who funds GREAT DANE RESCUE OF NORTH TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES DIOCESE OF FORT WORTH ↗
- Who funds SAMARITAN'S PURSE ↗
- Who funds CUISINE FOR HEALING ↗
- Who funds Tarrant Area Food Bank ↗
- Who funds CANCER CARE SERVICES ↗
- Who funds Trinity Love Hoblit Foundation ↗
- Who funds JEWEL CHARITY BALL INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds The New Horizons Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds FORT WORTH SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds TEXAS MEDICAL ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BAY AREA LATINO LAWYERS FUND ↗
- Who funds RUTLEDGE CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Fort Worth Garden Club Inc ↗
- Who funds Scouts Legacy Foundation ↗
- Who funds EQUEST ↗
- Who funds TARRANT COUNTY MEDICAL SOCIETY ALLIANCE FOUND ↗
- Who funds TEXAS COALITION FOR ANIMAL PROTECTION ↗
- Who funds THE DALLAS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CRISTO REY FORT WORTH CORPORATE WORK STUDY PROGRAM 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: Thomas M Helen McKee & John P Ryan Fo John P Ryan Foundation Inc · Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · Amon G Carter Foundation · Sid W Richardson Foundation · The Roach Foundation Inc · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · R4 Foundation · Garvey Texas Foundation Inc · Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353 · Mary Potishman Lard Trust Walker C Friedman Co Trustee · Ann L Rhodes and Carol Greene Rhodes · Bnsf Railway 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 McCallum Family 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.
- Pan-Massachusetts Challenge Inc — 0% of income from government
- K9S for Warriors Inc — 0% of income from government
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 McCallum Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to McCallum 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.