Skip to content
Texas for All at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Texas for All

The organization is established for the purpose of supporting coordinated investments and strategies that advance the social welfare of underrepresented communities in texas with a particular focus on people of color, people with disabilities, women, young, queer and gender diverse, and workingclass people.

$290k
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$25k
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, FY2022 to 2024.

Public Benefit$535kCivil Rights$200kCommunity Improvement$160kEducation$110kHealth$25kEmployment$25kMembership Benefit$25kReligion$15kOther$0
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$25,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$487k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEXAS AFT$25,000
WORKERS DEFENSE$25,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD TEXAS VOTES$25,000
BATTLEGROUND TEXAS ENGAGEMENT FUND$25,000
TEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK$25,000
MI FAMILIA VOTA$25,000
MOVE TEXAS ACTION FUND$25,000
ONE APIA TEXAS INC$25,000
TEXAS ORGANIZING PROJECTS$25,000
COMMUNITY LABOR ADMINISTRATIVE$25,000
GROUND GAME TX$10,000
JOLT$10,000
LUPE VOTES$10,000
1K WOMEN STRONG INC$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 (FY24–24, $10k) 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%JOLT: $10k → 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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

43%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$475k · 4 repeat orgs$630k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
6

Total granted

$475k
$440k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-24%
0%

Still filing today

75%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 34% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $190k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’24
Civil RightsPublic BenefitEducationReligionCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesOther
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

  • MT
    MOVE TEXAS ACTION FUND
    2× · 2022–2024 · $140k · revenue +2%
  • BE
    BGTX Engagement Fund
    2× · 2022–2024 · $135k · revenue -24%
  • TF
    TEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK
    2× · 2022–2024 · $135k · revenue -27%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $110k
  • FS
    FAIR SHOT TEXASgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $110k · revenue +96%
  • CV
    COMMUNITY VOICES FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION
    one grant, 2022 · $110k
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
Jolt Initiative

Jolt Initiative is a non-profit organization that increases the civic participation of Latinos in Texas to build a stronger democracy and ensure that everyone's voice is heard.

Civil Rights
2
Texas Justice Fund

To support legal, political & administrative efforts to protect fair voting.

—
3
Texas Future Action Fund

The Texas Future Action Fund supports and elevates civic engagement efforts of organizations in Texas through grantmaking, donor education, and fundraising to build long-term political power in our state.

—
4
Polichic Engagement Fund

The PoliChic Engagement Fund is committed to fostering civic participation among women and their families in Texas.

Civil Rights
5
Texas Blue Action Fund

Register and Educate Voters in Texas to increase civic engagement and voter turn out.

Civil Rights
6
Every Voice Texas dba Asian Texans for Justice

Asian Texans for Justice connects Asian and Pacific Islander Texans with civic action to build personal and political power.

Civil Rights
7
Texas Campaign for the Environment

Empowering Texans to fight pollution through sustained grassroots organizing campaigns that shift corporate and governmental policy.

Environment
8
Move Texas Civic Fund

MOVE Texas Civic Funds builds the power of young Texans through civic engagement, leadership development, and issue advocacy.

Community Improvement
9
The League of Women Voters of Texas

Empower voters and defend democracy in Texas. Provide support to local Leagues and support the development of new local chapters.

—
10
Raise Texas

RAISE Texas advances equitable policies and programs that foster financial security and economic mobility for low- and moderate-income Texans. We equip, innovate and advocate to reduce disparities, remove barriers and build opportunities…

Human Services
11
Progress Texas

Progress Texas is a non-profit media organization advocating for progressive ideals and policies in our state.

Civil Rights
12
Texas Clean Energy Coalition
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Texas Freedom Network; the most unlike its peers is Faith in Texas - Pico. 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

17 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. 17 of the 20 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
3/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MOVE TEXAS ACTION FUND: $140,000 · OtherMOVE TEXAS ACTION FUNDBGTX Engagement Fund: $135,000 · OtherBGTX Engagement FundTEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK: $135,000 · OtherTEXAS FREEDOM NETWORKIndividual grant recipient: $110,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientONE APIA TEXAS INC: $65,000 · OtherONE APIA TEXAS INCCOMMUNITY LABOR ADMINISTRATIVE: $25,000 · OtherAMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS: $25,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD TEXAS VOTES: $25,000 · Other+2 more: $20,000 · OtherFAIR DEMOCRACY: $75,000 · Civil RightsFAIR DEMOCRACYWORKERS DEFENSE ACTION FUND: $25,000 · Civil RightsWORKERS DEFENS…MI FAMILIA VOTA: $25,000 · Civil RightsMI FAMILIA VOT…ARENA SUMMIT: $20,000 · Civil RightsARENA SUMMITFAIR SHOT TEXAS: $110,000 · Public BenefitFAIR SHOT TE…Ground Game Texas: $10,000 · Public BenefitGround Game …COMMUNITY VOICES FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION: $110,000 · EducationCOMMUNITY V…TEXAS ORGANIZING PROJECT EDUCATION FUND: $25,000 · Community ImprovementFAITH IN TEXAS - PICO: $15,000 · ReligionJOLT ACTION INC: $10,000 · Human Services
Other$680,000Civil Rights$145,000Public Benefit$120,000Education$110,000Community Improvement$25,000Religion$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%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMOVE TEXAS ACTION FUND: $140,000 over 2y, 2.7% of budgetBGTX Engagement Fund: $135,000 over 2y, 6.9% of budgetTEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK: $135,000 over 2y, 4.3% of budgetFAIR SHOT TEXAS: $110,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetFAIR DEMOCRACY: $75,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetWORKERS DEFENSE ACTION FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetAMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMI FAMILIA VOTA: $25,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD TEXAS VOTES: $25,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetTEXAS ORGANIZING PROJECT EDUCATION FUND: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetARENA SUMMIT: $20,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetFAITH IN TEXAS - PICO: $15,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budget1K Women Strong Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetJOLT ACTION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetLUPE VOTES: $10,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetGround Game Texas: $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% 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.

Way to Win Action Fun…All Hands on Deck Net…Sixteen Thirty FundOpen Society Action F…Clean and Prosperous …Tides AdvocacyTides FoundationFuture Forward USA Ac…The Heising-Simons Ac…Women Donors Network …NEO Philanthropy Acti…Jacob and Terese Hers…
Way to Win Action Fund IncDC26.2× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Way to Win Action Fund Inc · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Sixteen Thirty Fund · Open Society Action Fund Inc · Clean and Prosperous America · Tides Advocacy · Tides Foundation · Future Forward USA Action · The Heising-Simons Action Fund · Women Donors Network Action · NEO Philanthropy Action Fund Inc · Jacob and Terese Hershey 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 Texas for All funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Texas for All. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Texas for All?

    Find your warmest path to Texas for All 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 20 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 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 Texas for All’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