Skip to content
Sylvia Ratner Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Sylvia Ratner 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.

$5k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Sylvia Ratner Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to The Community Foundation Of The Texas Hill Country Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

2
’18
1
’19
1
’20
2
’21
1
’22
1
’23
2
’24
0
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Philanthropy$14kHealth$12kEducation$7kHuman Services$4k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$4,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$202k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE TEXAS HILL COUNTRY$4,500
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, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%WONDERS AND WORRIES: $4k → 10%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 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
Baylor Research Institute

To improve the care and well being of our community, nationally and internationally, through innovative clinically relevant research that is consistent with the mission, vision and values of Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH).

Health
2
United Way for Greater Austin

United way for greater austin brings our community together to break economic barriers and build opportunity for all.

Philanthropy
3
Breakthrough T1D

Breakthrough t1d is the leading global t1d organization working to accelerate life-changing breakthroughs to cure, prevent, and treat t1d and its complications.

Health
4
Strategic Education Research Partnership Institute

The strategic education research partnership generates innovative, scalable solutions to our schools' most pressing problems through sustained collaborations among researchers, practitioners, and designers. we work to increase equity,…

Science & Tech
5
Austin Partners in Education

Apie provides college and career readiness support through individualized academic and mentoring programs to prepare students for success.

Education
6
Baylor Health Care System Foundation

To foster and support the activities and purposes of Baylor Scott & White Health, to encourage broad-based public support of the health care system and its affiliated institutions, and to advance the medical objectives, including…

Health
7
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Fdn Group

Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.

—
8
Readworksinc

Readworks is an education-technology non-profit focused on improving reading comprehension that, through its digital platform, provides research-based content, curricular supports, and other features that integrate with core english…

Education
9
Pulmonary Fibrosis Foundation

The pulmonary fibrosis foundation is committed to accelerating research, empowering our community, and transforming care so that everyone with pulmonary fibrosis can live a better life. our ultimate goal is to find a cure for pulmonary…

Health
10
Blood Cancer United Inc

Our mission is to cure leukemia, lymphoma, hodgkin's disease and myeloma, and improve the quality of life of patients and their families.

Health
11
Brightfocus Foundation

Brightfocus foundation funds exceptional research worldwide to defeat alzheimer's disease, macular degeneration, and glaucoma and provides expert information on these heartbreaking diseases. please refer to schedule o for a complete…

Health
12
Women Involved in Nurturing Giving Sharing Inc

To enroll low-income, uninsured women in central and south texas in a no-cost program to pay all charges related to breast cancer treatment and lifetime follow-up care.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pancreatic Cancer Action Network Inc; the most unlike its peers is Reading Is Fundamental 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

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 10 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNITED WAY OF SAN ANTONIO AND BEXAR COUNTY: $7,000 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF SAN ANTONIO AND BEXAR COUNTYBoerne Education Foundation: $5,200 · PhilanthropyBoerne Education FoundationTHE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE TEXAS HILL COUNTRY INC: $4,500 · PhilanthropyTHE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE TEXAS HILL COUNTRY INCUNITED WAY OF SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA: $2,250 · PhilanthropyUNITED WAY OF SOUTHEAST LOUISIANASAN ANTONIO LIFETIME RECOVERY INC DBA LIFETIME RECOVERY: $5,750 · HealthSAN ANTONIO LIFETIME RECOVERY IN…PANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC: $4,200 · HealthPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK…APBD RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $500 · HealthWonders & Worries Inc: $3,500 · Human ServicesWonders & …READING IS FUNDAMENTAL INC: $1,750 · EducationNAMI: $1,750 · Other
Philanthropy$18,950Health$10,450Human Services$3,500Education$1,750Other$1,750

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 budgetUNITED WAY OF SAN ANTONIO AND BEXAR COUNTY: $7,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAN ANTONIO LIFETIME RECOVERY INC DBA LIFETIME RECOVERY: $5,750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBoerne Education Foundation: $5,200 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTHE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE TEXAS HILL COUNTRY INC: $4,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC: $4,200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWonders & Worries Inc: $3,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetUNITED WAY OF SOUTHEAST LOUISIANA: $2,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetREADING IS FUNDAMENTAL INC: $1,750 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAPBD RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.6% 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.

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.

San Antonio Area Foun…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…
San Antonio Area FoundationTX13.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: San Antonio Area Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Sylvia Ratner Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Sylvia Ratner 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%5%10%15%20%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 · 0–20%
    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 10 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 Sylvia Ratner’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