· Private foundation
R4 Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k28 grants · $116k
- $10k–50k36 grants · $456k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Breakthrough T1D | $250,000 |
| CENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVES | $50,000 |
| The University of Georgia Foundation | $50,000 |
| COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTH TEXAS | $40,000 |
| UNIVERSITY CHRISTIAN CHURCH | $35,000 |
| DESMOID TUMOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| NORTH TEXAS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| One Safe Place | $17,500 |
| LENA POPE | $13,000 |
| THE LADDER ALLIANCE | $10,000 |
| FunkyYown Food Project | $10,000 |
| CRISTO REY FORT WORTH | $10,000 |
| ACH CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES | $10,000 |
| Hs2 | $10,000 |
| ACE SCHOLARSHIPS | $10,000 |
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, $461k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, 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.
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 +26% since the first grant, against +23% for the ones you funded once.
85 repeat relationships — 57 still active in FY2024, 28 since wound down; 8 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, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $97k 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
- BTBREAKTHROUGH T1D6× · 2019–2024 · $375k · revenue +26%
- TVTRINITY VALLEY SCHOOL3× · 2018–2020 · $250k · revenue +35%
- CFCENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVES7× · 2018–2024 · $145k · revenue +268%
Funded once
PARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXASgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue +89%- BPBluefield Projectone grant, 2018 · $21k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2017 · $20k
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 mission of Royal Public Schools is to spark students' natural curiosity and love of learning while providing the knowledge and skills they need to lead successful and fulfilling lives.
The mission of texas trees foundation is to improve the health of cities and people through the transformative power of trees.
The texas tribune promotes civic engagement and public education across the state by producing and sharing for free public data interactives, statewide events and intensive and daily reporting on texas public policy, politics and current…
We believe every texas student deserves the opportunity to earn a postsecondary credential or degree that helps them achieve the future they envision for themselves and their families. we invest in the programs, practices, and policies…
With more than 1 million patient visits each year, Children's Health is North Texas' leading pediatric health system and among the largest in the nation. For more than a century, our mission has been clear: make life better for children.…
The trinity charter schools system has 11 campuses in texas. all 11 campuses work with youth who have emotional difficulties, and need active engagement in planning and guiding their own academic careers through student led credit…
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 bring collaborative, systemic change for students in order to improve overall quality of life and to position tarrant county as a leading producer of high-quality talent.
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…
Education of children and youth
The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.
Klru is a leader in public media, distinguished by its energetic engagement with the community and for the quality and creativity of content. klru illuminates the wider world of knowledge; the importance of discourse; and the many…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Momentous Institute and the most unlike its peers is Tolar Volunteer Fire Department. 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 34 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 17% 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 148 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 COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF NORTH TEXAS (TAX ↗
- Who funds BREAKTHROUGH T1D ↗
- Who funds TRINITY VALLEY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVES ↗
- Who funds JUBILEE PLAYERS INC ↗
- Who funds ACH CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds CASA MANANA INC ↗
- Who funds READ FORT WORTH ↗
- Who funds Teach for America Inc ↗
- Who funds THE ART STATION ↗
- Who funds RUTLEDGE CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FIRST3YEARS ↗
- Who funds LENA POPE HOME INC ↗
- Who funds CHILD CARE ASSOCIATES ↗
- Who funds TEXAS BALLET THEATER INC ↗
- Who funds CASA OF TARRANT COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds CAMP FIRE FIRST TEXAS ↗
- Who funds TEXAS WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Van Cliburn Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CUISINE FOR HEALING ↗
- Who funds SINACA STUDIOS - SCHOOL OF GLASS AND GALLERY ↗
- Who funds UnBound North Texas ↗
- Who funds North Texas Healthy Communities ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER TARRANT COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds CANCER CARE SERVICES ↗
- Who funds JUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF THE CHISHOLM TRAIL INC ↗
- Who funds THE DESMOID TUMOR RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Momentous Institute ↗
- Who funds TEXAS ACADEMY 4 ↗
- Who funds CRISTO REY FORT WORTH CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds UPLIFT EDUCATION ↗
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 · Sid W Richardson Foundation · Amon G Carter Foundation · The Morris Foundation · Rainwater Charitable Foundation · Garvey Texas Foundation Inc · Bnsf Railway Foundation · Amon G Carter-Star Tele Emply Fund · Paul E Andrews Jr Foundation · The Miles Foundation Inc · Communities Foundation of 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 R4 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 R4 Foundation?
Find your warmest path to R4 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.