Skip to content
Sholar Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Sholar Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$359k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$120k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

International$280kEducation$265kReligion$257kCommunity Improvement$218kCrime & Legal$141kHuman Services$70kHealth$66kArts & Culture$10k
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$100,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$763k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TOGETHER FOR HOPE$120,000
SINAPIS$100,000
BAYLOR UNIVERSITY$88,819
NEOTOPIA$50,000
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 (FY18–22, $207k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 15% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%RIP MEDICAL DEBT: $36k → 9%RIP MEDICAL DEBT: $30k → 13%LIGHT OF HOPE IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER: $101k → 5%LIGHT OF HOPE IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER: $40k → 5%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.

Which US states its grants reach

ID
NY
NC
SC
MS
GA
TX
FL
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 14% of Sholar Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 47% of the giving stays in TX; by stated purpose, 49%.

Sholar Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

58%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$757k · 5 repeat orgs$550k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
9

Total granted

$757k
$400k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+40%

Still filing today

100%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $150k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • BAYLOR UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2021–2024 · $240k · revenue +15%
  • LO
    LIGHT OF HOPE IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER
    2× · 2018–2022 · $141k · revenue +129%
  • GO
    GATEWAY OF GRACE
    2× · 2018–2021 · $70k · revenue +10%

Funded once

  • TF
    TOGETHER FOR HOPE
    one grant, 2022 · $118k
  • AT
    AUBURN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
    one grant, 2017 · $60k · revenue -47%
  • IF
    INVESTED FAITH
    one grant, 2023 · $50k
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

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
North America Bible Institute

North America Bible Institute (NABI) is an evangelical graduate school, made up of students who are diverse in both ethnicity and ministry aims -- but united in great love for Jesus and his gospel. As a graduate school, NABI offers them…

Education
2
Biola University Inc

Biola university is a private christian university located in southern california. for over 116 years, biola has stood out as an institution grounded on biblically centered education, intentional spiritual development, and career…

Education
3
William Jessup University

In partnership with the church, the purpose of william jessup university is to educate transformational leaders for the glory of god.

—
4
Instituto De Estudios Teologicos

Conference

Education
5
Texas Christian University

Texas christian university is an institution of higher education which includes nine major academic units: liberal arts, science and engineering, business, education, fine arts, communication, honors, nursing and health sciences, and the…

Education
6
Wake Forest University

Wake Forest University, a 501(c)(3) institution of higher education, is dedicated to the pursuit of excellence in the liberal arts and in graduate and professional education. The organization is comprised of seven constituent parts: Wake…

Education
7
Newman University Inc

We are a catholic university named for saint john henry newman and founded by the adorers of the blood of christ for the purpose of empowering graduates to transform society. our core values (see schedule o for continuation)

Education
8
Texas Leadership Summit

Empowering everyday leaders with courage, tools and hope to ignite a revival of christian leadership.

Religion
9
Great Commission University Inc

Gcu serves the global church by educating mission leaders to fulfill the great commission of jesus christ. gcu accomplishes this mission through a comprehensive program of biblical and general education, christ-centered service and…

Education
10
The Moody Bible Institute of Chicago

Moody Bible Institute is a higher education and media ministry that exists to equip people with the truth of God's word to be maturing followers of Christ who are making disciples around the world. Moody is best known for its education…

Education
11
Yeshiva University

The university is composed of several colleges and schools providing undergraduate, graduate, professional and post-doctoral education and training and research and clinical programs.

Education
12
Pacific Theological Seminary

To deliver biblically-based education and ministry mentoring through graduate-level degree programs.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Together for Hope; the most unlike its peers is Polyphony Music Resources Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

9 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. 9 of the 16 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TOGETHER FOR HOPE: $118,000 · OtherTOGETHER FOR HOPESINAPIS: $100,000 · OtherSINAPISINVESTED FAITH: $50,000 · OtherINVESTED FAITHKIMIYA INTERNATIONAL: $40,000 · OtherKIMIYA INTERNATIONALPolyphony Music Resources Inc: $39,000 · OtherPolyphony Music Resources IncWILSHIRE BAPTIST CHURCH: $33,333 · OtherWILSHIRE BAPTIST CHURCHIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+1 more: $10,000 · OtherBAYLOR UNIVERSITY: $240,103 · EducationBAYLOR UNIVERSITYAUBURN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $60,000 · EducationAUBURN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARYNEOTOPIA: $50,000 · EducationNEOTOPIADUKE UNIVERSITY: $25,000 · EducationDUKE UNIVERSITYLIGHT OF HOPE IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER: $141,000 · Human ServicesLIGHT OF HOPE IMMIGRATIO…GATEWAY OF GRACE: $70,000 · Human ServicesGATEWAY OF GRACEMEDICAL DEBT RESOLUTION INC: $65,885 · Human ServicesMEDICAL DEBT RESOLUTION …TOGETHER FOR HOPE: $240,000 · Community ImprovementTOGETHER FOR HOPE
Other$415,333Education$375,103Human Services$276,885Community Improvement$240,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBAYLOR UNIVERSITY: $240,103 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTOGETHER FOR HOPE: $240,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetLIGHT OF HOPE IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER: $141,000 over 2y, 15% of budgetGATEWAY OF GRACE: $70,000 over 2y, 8.6% of budgetMEDICAL DEBT RESOLUTION INC: $65,885 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetAUBURN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY: $60,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetNEOTOPIA: $50,000 over 1y, 62% of budgetDUKE UNIVERSITY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%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 · 0–30%
    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 Sholar Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Sholar 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 16 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 Sholar’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home