· Private foundation
Rushing River 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
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $11k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $209k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $275k
- $250k+2 grants · $3.3M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CAMP OZARK FOUNDATION | $3,025,000 |
| THE WOODLANDS UNITED METHODIST CHURCH | $300,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $125,000 |
| WIMBERLEY VALLEY WATERSHED ASSOCIATION | $100,000 |
| HILL COUNTRY ALLIANCE | $50,000 |
| INSPIRATION RANCH | $30,800 |
| ANGEL REACH | $28,300 |
| UNIVERSITY OF HOUSTON | $25,000 |
| DOG ALLIANCE | $25,000 |
| BLOOD CANCER UNITED | $25,000 |
| THE SLOTH INSTITUTE | $25,000 |
| SMALL STEPS NURTURING CENTER | $25,000 |
| TESPA | $25,000 |
| THE DAVE THOMAS FOUNDATION FOR ADOPTION | $6,150 |
| MAKE-A-WISH CENTRAL & SOUTH TEXAS | $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 (FY18–24, $264k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 2% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 95% of Rushing River Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 95% of the giving stays in TX; read by stated purpose it is 100% — more of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +100% since the first grant, against -70% for the ones you funded once.
14 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 7 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, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $261k 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
- COCAMP OZARK FOUNDATION INC5× · 2018–2024 · $5.1M · revenue +372% · 72% of their budget
- WVWimberley Valley Watershed Association5× · 2019–2024 · $450k · revenue +147%
- SSSmall Steps Nurturing Center5× · 2020–2024 · $275k · revenue +19%
Funded once
- UOUniversity of Houston - Gift Procesone grant, 2022 · $50k
- HMHouston Methodist Hospital Foundatione grant, 2023 · $25k
- MCMEADOWS CENTER FOR WATER AND THE ENVIRONMENTone grant, 2018 · $25k
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.
ConnectAbility's mission is to empower those with life altering disabilities and their caregivers to reach their fullest potential.
Plant, protect and promote trees all over the greater Houston area.
The mission of texas trees foundation is to improve the health of cities and people through the transformative power of trees.
RAISE Texas advances equitable policies and programs that foster financial security and economic mobility for low- and moderate-income Texans. We equip, innovate and advocate to reduce disparities, remove barriers and build opportunities…
Through faith in action, austin habitat for humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope.
Texas water foundation is a statewide nonprofit that provides educational resources and educational services on water in texas for decision makers, water professionals, and everyday texans. texas water foundation works in the areas of…
To strengthen families through parenting classes educational programs, youth programs and referral services for the prevention of child abuse and neglect.
The Organizations mission is to bring unity and efficiency to investigations of child abuse through the use of a multi-disciplinary team and, thereby, to provide the best possible services to victims of child abuse and their families.
When care is within reach, lives change. Texas Community Counseling is a faith-based nonprofit committed to bringing hope and healing through mental health care to the communities that need it the most. We empower individuals to heal,…
TexProtects advances public policy and local implementation to strenghten families to prevent child abuse and neglect.
Texans Care for Children shapes public policies and brings Texans together to make children a statewide priority. We work so kids can have what they need to be healthy, secure, and thriving and so every Texan can have the best start to…
Good Work Austin's mission is to foster healthy careers in the local food and beverage industry through professional development and advocacy for more equitable practices.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Central & South Texas and the most unlike its peers is Gods Garage Inc. 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 29 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 CAMP OZARK FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Wimberley Valley Watershed Association ↗
- Who funds Small Steps Nurturing Center ↗
- Who funds Hill Country Alliance ↗
- Who funds ANGEL REACH ↗
- Who funds TreeFolks Inc ↗
- Who funds Gods Garage Inc ↗
- Who funds Global Impact ↗
- Who funds INSPIRATION RANCH INC ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN DOG ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds DAVE THOMAS FOUNDATION FOR ADOPTION ↗
- Who funds CITYSQUARE ↗
- Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF CENTRAL & SOUTH TEXAS ↗
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: Shell USA Company Foundation · Austin Community Foundation Inc · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Rushing River 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.