· Private foundation
Tch W & F Hendrix Fdn
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k48 grants · $186k
- $10k–50k13 grants · $214k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $174k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BETHEL UNIVERSITY | $124,154 |
| JANIE STARR WOMEN'S ATHLETIC FUND | $50,000 |
| YWCA OF MIDDLE TN | $32,500 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MIDDLE | $32,500 |
| SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER | $25,000 |
| ALIVE HOSPICE OF NASHVILLE | $20,000 |
| FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF DAYTONA | $19,000 |
| VANDERBILT TUTORIAL SCHOLARSHIP FUND | $12,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $12,000 |
| NASHVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION | $10,500 |
| VASHON YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES | $10,000 |
| VASHON HOUSEHOLD | $10,000 |
| NASHVILLE SYMPHONY | $10,000 |
| VASHON ISLAND GROWERS ASSN | $10,000 |
| INTERFAITH COUNCIL TO PREVENT HOMLESSNES | $10,000 |
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 (FY20–25, $74k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 14% 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.
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 +39% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.
67 repeat relationships — 58 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $43k 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
SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER6× · 2020–2025 · $129k · revenue +46%
Vanderbilt University3× · 2020–2025 · $77k · revenue +65%- 4S413 STRONG INC6× · 2020–2025 · $64k · revenue +118%
Funded once
- PPPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF TENNESSEEone grant, 2024 · $31k
- NPNASHVILLE PUBLIC RADIOone grant, 2020 · $18k · revenue +14%
- LRLOMAKATSI RESTORATION PROJECTone grant, 2024 · $4k · revenue 0%
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.
Taproot Earth works with communities to support strategies around the use of water, energy and land.
Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.
The Center for Environmental Law & Policy is a statewide organization whose mission is to protect, preserve and restore Washington's waters through education, advocacy, policy reform, and public interest litigation.
Fsc i&p promotes environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world's forests. this mission aligns with the forest stewardship council (fsc), its network of offices, and other organizations.…
RE Sources mobilizes people of Northwest Washington to build just and thriving communities and to protect the land, water, and climate on which we all depend.
The Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council is a local nonprofit organization that strives to enhance and restore habitat for fish and wildlife our community and for future generations. Our Board of Directors consists of seven members with…
To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.
KCSARC is the largest and most comprehensive non-profit provider of sexual assault services in King County and Washington State. Our vision is a community free of sexual violence. Our mission is to: give voice to victims, their families,…
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
Oregon Justice Network is an alliance built and staffed by criminal legal system impacted people advocating for the well-being of people affected or at-risk of being affected by carceral systems. Our work centers around restorative…
The Alliance for Collective Action convenes leaders of environmental and social movements to advance solutions for a thriving planet. We advance our mission through the Alliance Center building and community, as well as through Collective…
Creating a greener, healthier, more equitable, and better Washington for all through community outreach, network building, and advocacy for conservation and outdoor recreation funding.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwest Immigrant Rights Project and the most unlike its peers is Nashville Symphony Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 30 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
48 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. 48 of the 80 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 BETHEL UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds Vanderbilt University ↗
- Who funds 413 STRONG INC ↗
- Who funds NASHVILLE PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Nashville Symphony Association ↗
- Who funds VASHON YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds Tacoma Community House ↗
- Who funds VASHON ISLAND GROWERS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds NASHVILLE PUBLIC TELEVISION INC ↗
- Who funds VASHON HOUSEHOLD ↗
- Who funds Tacoma Urban League ↗
- Who funds OUR KIDS INC ↗
- Who funds MARTHA O'BRYAN CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds VASHON-MAURY ISLAND LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds KLAMATH-SISKIYOU WILDLANDS CENTER ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE SOLUTIONS ↗
- Who funds Rogue Climate ↗
- Who funds Earthcorps ↗
- Who funds THE DOVE PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Oregon Natural Resources Council Fund Oregon Wild ↗
- Who funds Downtown Emergency Service Center ↗
- Who funds Hilltop Urban Gardens ↗
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: Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Seattle Foundation · Greater Tacoma Community Foundation · The Oregon Community Foundation · Medina Foundation · Impactassetsinc · The Norcliffe Foundation · The Satterberg Foundation Inc · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · Gates Foundation · The Bullitt Foundation
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 Tch W & F Hendrix Fdn 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Lomakatsi Restoration Project — 100% of income from government
- Siskiyou Mountain Club — 22% of income from government
- Rogue Climate — 7% of income from government
- White Oak Farm & Education Center — 5% of income from government
- Oregon Natural Resources Council Fund Oregon Wild — 2% of income from government
- Family & Childrens Services Inc — 1% of income from government
- Seeding Justice — 0% of income from government
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.