Skip to content

· Private foundation

Sally and Charlie Cheever 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.

$725k
Granted FY2024still arriving
16
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$300k
Largest
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Education$748kArts & Culture$740kYouth Development$225kHealth$155kReligion$135kCrime & Legal$115kHuman Services$35kOther$0
02FY2024 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k5 grants · $25k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $100k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $300k
  • $250k+1 grant · $300k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION$300,000
REMEMBER THE ALAMO FOUNDATION$200,000
GIRL SCOUTS OF SOUTHWEST TEXAS$100,000
VILLAGE OF THE INCARNATE WORD RET COMM$20,000
SANTA ROSA CHILDRENS HOSPITAL FDN$20,000
SETON HOME FOR PREGNANT WOMEN$10,000
FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION SERV$10,000
WITTE MUSEUM$10,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
ARMY RETIREMENT RESIDENCE SUPPORTING$10,000
SAN FERNANDO CATHEDRAL$10,000
DAUGHTERS OF THE REPUBLIC$5,000
ASSOC OF GRAD OF THE US MIL ACAD$5,000
ARCHDIOSESE OF SAN ANTONIO$5,000
MCNAY MUSEUM$5,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $10k) 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION SERV: $10k → 16%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.2M · 17 repeat orgs$70k to everyone else

17 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
3

Total granted

$2.2M
$35k

Still filing today

29%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’20’21’22’23’24
Arts & CultureHealthHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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 INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $725k · revenue +88%
  • RT
    Remember the Alamo Foundation
    3× · 2022–2024 · $600k · revenue +336%
  • GS
    GIRL SCOUTS OF SOUTHWEST TEXAS INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $195k · revenue +11%

Funded once

  • VO
    VILLAGE OF INCARNATE WORD RET COM
    one grant, 2020 · $20k
  • AR
    ARMY RETIREMENT RES FDN
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
  • DO
    DAUGTHERS OF THE REPUBLIC OF TEXAS-ALAMO MISSION CHAPTER
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field
04the grantee network

7 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 7 of the 23 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INC: $725,000 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INCGIRL SCOUTS OF SOUTHWEST TEXAS INC: $195,000 · OtherGIRL SCOUTS OF SOUTHWEST TEXAS INCFAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION CENTER: $115,000 · OtherFAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION CENTERCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF SAN ANTONIO: $90,000 · OtherCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF SAN ANTONIOIndividual grant recipient: $85,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+13 more: $323,000 · Other+13 moreRemember the Alamo Foundation: $600,000 · Arts & CultureRemember the Alamo FoundationWitte Museum: $50,000 · Arts & CultureWitte MuseumCHRISTUS CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $20,000 · HealthARMY RETIREMENT RESIDENCE SUPPORTING FOU: $15,000 · Housing & ShelterFAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION SERVICES INC: $10,000 · Human Services
Other$1,533,000Arts & Culture$650,000Health$20,000Housing & Shelter$15,000Human Services$10,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INC: $725,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetRemember the Alamo Foundation: $600,000 over 3y, 3.2% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF SOUTHWEST TEXAS INC: $195,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetWitte Museum: $50,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetCHRISTUS CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetARMY RETIREMENT RESIDENCE SUPPORTING FOU: $15,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION SERVICES INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Remember the Alamo Foundation ↗
  • Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF SOUTHWEST TEXAS INC ↗
  • Who funds Witte Museum ↗
  • Who funds CHRISTUS CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ARMY RETIREMENT RESIDENCE SUPPORTING FOU ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION SERVICES INC ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Charitable Foundation Frost F0359600TX15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Charitable Foundation Frost F0359600 · The Texas Cavaliers Charitable Foundation · Betty Stieren Kelso Foundation · Nancy Smith Hurd Foundation · Elizabeth Huth Coates Charitable Foundation of 1992 · The Klesse Foundation · Marietta K Randall Foundation Trust · Marcia & Otto Koehler Foundation · Pryor Myra Stafford Char Tr F0030100 · John L Santikos Charitable Foundation · Harvey E Najim Charitable Foundation · United Way of San Antonio and Bexar County

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Sally and Charlie Cheever Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sally and Charlie Cheever Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Sally and Charlie Cheever Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Sally and Charlie Cheever 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 23 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Sally and Charlie Cheever’s filings →

    More from the funding graph