Skip to content

· Private foundation

Squibb Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$132k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$112k
Largest
01What it funds
0184% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Religion$175kEducation$105kYouth Development$73kCommunity Improvement$55kHuman Services$19kFood & Nutrition$8kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $112k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY PARK UNITED METHODIST CH$111,715
Project Transformation-North Texas$10,000
PROJECT TRANSFORMATION-NATIONAL$10,000
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 (FY19–20, $11k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%NORTH DALLAS SHARED MINISTRIES: $10k → 14%NORTH DALLAS SHARED MINISTRIES: $1k → 14%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$469k · 13 repeat orgs$5k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +73% since the first grant, against +60% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
5

Total granted

$469k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+73%
+60%

Still filing today

38%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentReligionOther
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

  • PT
    PROJECT TRANSFORMATION NATIONAL
    7× · 2019–2025 · $105k · revenue +774%
  • PT
    PROJECT TRANSFORMATION NORTH TEXAS
    5× · 2021–2025 · $73k · revenue +11%
  • ND
    NORTH DALLAS SHARED MINISTRIES INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $11k · revenue +73%

Funded once

  • FU
    FIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH - HAW
    one grant, 2017 · $1k
  • UG
    UNION GOSPEL MISSIONS
    one grant, 2019 · $1k
  • DB
    DALLAS BETHLEHEM CENTER INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +60%
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 Texas Christian Foundation

National Christian Foundation North Texas (NCFNT) was created to facilitate smarter Christian giving with sophisticated charitable techniques.

Philanthropy
2
North Dallas Food Pantry

North Dallas Food Pantry (DBA NTX Community Food Pantry) is dedicated to building relationships by sharing resources, hope and faith in a welcoming environment, with love and dignaty.

Human Services
3
UnBound North Texas

Unbound North Texas exists to support survivors and resource the community to fight human trafficking through Survivor Advocacy, a 24/7 Drop-In Center, and Prevention and Awareness.

—
4
For the Nations Refugee Outreach

To provide general education and family services that help meet the practical needs of refugees and to share with them the gospel of Jesus Christ. We serve refugees from more than 20 countries resettled legally and permanently in the DFW…

International
5
Pleasant Grove Food Pantry Inc

Pleasant Grove Food Pantry provides nutritious food to qualified residents of Pleasant Grove in southeast Dallas who are food insecure. Fighting food insecurity is the mission and intent of the organization. Services are provided by…

Food & Nutrition
6
Dallas Theological Seminary

The mission of Dallas Theological Seminary is to glorify God by equipping godly servant-leaders for the proclamation of His Word and the building up of the body of Christ worldwide.

Education
7
Dallas Christian School

Dallas Christian is a college preparatory school committed to Biblical values where students are prepared for Christ-centered lives of purpose, service and leadership.

Education
8
Trinity Athletics

To use functional fitness to raise a generation of Servant Leaders in North Texas

Youth Development
9
Progress Texas Institute

The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.

Civil Rights
10
Transform Ministries
—
11
Next Worldwide Inc

With a desire to see the Gospel proclaimed in all nations, we exist to make and multiply disciples of the next generation through the vehicles of church-planting missions and missional leadership training.

—
12
Tarrant Net

The purpose of Tarrant Net is to To participate with God in His vision to see Christian churches and ministries from across racial and denominational lines workin

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Project Transformation North Texas; the most unlike its peers is Senior Citizens of Greater Dallas Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 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. 8 of the 18 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY PARK UNITED METHODIST CH: $131,515 · OtherUNIVERSITY PARK UNITED METHODIST CHProject Transformation: $55,000 · OtherProject TransformationIndividual grant recipient: $27,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $9,000 · Other+9 more: $29,000 · Other+9 morePROJECT TRANSFORMATION NATIONAL: $105,000 · EducationPROJECT TRANSFORMATION NATIONA…Lydia Patterson Institute: $21,000 · EducationLydia Patterson InstitutePROJECT TRANSFORMATION NORTH TEXAS: $72,500 · Youth DevelopmentPROJECT TRANSFORM…East-West Ministries International: $13,000 · ReligionNORTH DALLAS SHARED MINISTRIES INC: $11,000 · Human Services
Other$251,515Education$126,000Youth Development$72,500Religion$13,000Human Services$11,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPROJECT TRANSFORMATION NATIONAL: $105,000 over 7y, 5.4% of budgetPROJECT TRANSFORMATION NORTH TEXAS: $72,500 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetLydia Patterson Institute: $21,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetNORTH DALLAS SHARED MINISTRIES INC: $11,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetNORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK: $8,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDALLAS BETHLEHEM CENTER INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSENIOR CITIZENS OF GREATER DALLAS INC: $1,000 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.

  • Who funds PROJECT TRANSFORMATION NATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT TRANSFORMATION NORTH TEXAS ↗
  • Who funds Lydia Patterson Institute ↗
  • Who funds East-West Ministries International ↗
  • Who funds NORTH DALLAS SHARED MINISTRIES INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds DALLAS BETHLEHEM CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds SENIOR CITIZENS OF GREATER DALLAS 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.

Communities Foundation of Texas IncTX15.1× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · United Way of Metropolitan Dallas Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Squibb Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Squibb Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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.

    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 18 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Squibb Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph