· Private foundation
Perry & Ruby Stevens Charitable Foundation
Its FY2024 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
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 59% of PERRY & RUBY STEVENS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k4 grants · $18k
- $10k–50k22 grants · $436k
- $50k–250k13 grants · $1.3M
- $250k+3 grants · $1.3M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION FOR THE BENEFIT OF UT HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER | $500,000 |
| HILL COUNTRY COMMUNITY NEEDS COUNCIL | $500,000 |
| FRIO CANYON EMS | $300,000 |
| TEXAS LIONS CAMP | $175,000 |
| HILL COUNTRY YOUTH RANCH | $170,000 |
| MOUNTAIN HOME VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT | $140,000 |
| DIETERT CENTER | $125,000 |
| SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK | $120,000 |
| ST JUDE'S RANCH FOR CHILDREN - TEXAS REGION INC (SJRC TEXAS) | $100,000 |
| CHILDREN'S ASSOCIATION FOR MAXIMUM POTENTIAL (CAMP) | $100,000 |
| ROY MAAS YOUTH ALTERNATIVES INC | $100,000 |
| EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF WEST TEXAS | $80,000 |
| HABITAT FOR HUMANITY KERR COUNTY | $67,500 |
| ARTHUR NAGEL COMMUNITY CLINIC INC | $50,000 |
| THE GOOD SAMARITAN CENTER | $50,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $3.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 63% 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 +45% since the first grant, against +4% for the ones you funded once.
72 repeat relationships — 33 still active in FY2024, 39 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $749k 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
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INC3× · 2017–2019 · $1.2M · revenue +213%- SASAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK7× · 2017–2024 · $828k · revenue +60%
- MWMorgan's Wonderland2× · 2019–2020 · $750k · revenue +92%
Funded once
- UHUT HEALTH SCIENCE CENTERone grant, 2021 · $300k
- KRKimble Rural Fire Departmentone grant, 2022 · $250k · revenue -65% · 34% of their budget
- TDTHE DOYLE SCHOOL COMMUNITY CENTERone grant, 2020 · $250k · revenue -50% · 36% of their budget
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.
A state of texas licensed foster care and adoption agency that identifies and provides approved healing foster homes for children.
Provide fire fighting & ambulance service to hankamer, texas and surrounding areas.
To provide fire protection and rescue services for our citizens and to manage a Toys for Karnes County Tots program.
Rescue and place abandoned and unwanted pets. Provide low cost spay / neuter. Provide low-cost microchips. Provide community education.
Provide fire suppression and first responder services to the Boerne, Tx area as well as provide support to the Boerne Fire Department.
Indian creek volunteer fire department provides fire, rescue, and emergency medical services to the indian creek fire district in cooke county, texas.
To provide shelter to abused families.
Animal Rescue
To provide fire protection, education, emergency medical treatment and rescue services to approx 140 sq miles in guadalupe county texas.
To keep communities healthy and strong by leveraging partnerships with local regional governments, area hospitals, and local health-care providers. To provide excellent patient care to local taxpayers.
Animal rescue and rehabilitation
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Highland Lakes Family Crisis Center and the most unlike its peers is Art 2 Heart. 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 29 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
93 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. 93 of the 151 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 THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY COMMUNITY NEEDS COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds Create Healthy Management ↗
- Who funds SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY YOUTH RANCH ↗
- Who funds Morgan's Wonderland ↗
- Who funds THE GRACE CENTER ↗
- Who funds GOOD SAMARITAN CENTER OF SAN ANTONIO ↗
- Who funds FRIO CANYON EMS INC ↗
- Who funds SJRC TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds SIGHT SAVERS OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds ARTHUR NAGEL COMMUNITY CLINIC INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS LIONS CAMP INC ↗
- Who funds Kimble Rural Fire Department ↗
- Who funds THE DOYLE SCHOOL COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
- Who funds HEART OF THE HILLS HERITAGE CENTER ↗
- Who funds DIETERT CENTER ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY DAILY BREAD ↗
- Who funds ROY MAAS' YOUTH ALTERNATIVES INC ↗
- Who funds BANDERA COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HEALTH DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds RAINBOW SENIOR CENTER ↗
- Who funds PATHWAYS YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds WILDLIFE RESCUE AND REHABILITATION INC ↗
- Who funds Comfort Volunteer Fire Department ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAIN HOME VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
- Who funds RAPHAEL COMMUNITY FREE CLINIC 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: Hal & Charlie Peterson Foundation & Fd Mgmt Trust · The Community Foundation of the Texas Hill Country Inc · San Antonio Area Foundation · Floyd a & Kathleen C Cailloux Foundation · Harvey E Najim Charitable Foundation · Faye L & William L Cowden Charitable Foundation · The Gvtc Foundation Inc · Carl C Anderson Sr and Marie Jo Anderson Charitable Foundation · San Antonio Food Bank · St Luke's Lutheran Health Ministries Inc · United Way of San Antonio and Bexar County · Methodist Healthcare Ministries of South Texas 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 Perry & Ruby Stevens 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 Perry & Ruby Stevens Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Perry & Ruby Stevens 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.