Skip to content
Texas Freedom Network Education Fund at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Texas Freedom Network Education Fund

The TEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK EDUCATION FUND supports civic education, voter engagement and research to promote equality, religious freedom and social justice.

$713k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$320k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2024.

Public Benefit$2.7MHuman Services$1.5MYouth Development$1.2MCivil Rights$551kCommunity Improvement$45kCrime & Legal$25k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $536,168, the rows itemized in this filing. The $713,415 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $177,247 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $206k
  • $250k+1 grant · $320k
$206,334
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MOVE TEXAS CIVIC ENGAGEMENT FUND$320,334
JOLT INITIATIVE$206,334
RADICAL REGISTRARS$9,500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY18–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 61% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%THE GOOD DEED CORPS: $25k → 12%CENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY: $100k → 20%TEXAS CIVIL RIGHTS PROJECT: $75k → 10%RADICAL REGISTRARS: $35k → 16%PURE JUSTICE: $25k → 16%MOVE TEXAS CIVIC ENGAGEMENT FUND (FISCAL SPONSOR ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANI: $404k → 14%TARAL PRO-CHOICE TEXAS FOUNDATION: $6k → 10%MOVE TEXAS CIVIC ENGAGEMENT FUND (FISCAL SPONSOR ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANI: $499k → 16%ORGANIZATION OF CHINESE AMERICANS INC: $6k → 16%MOVE TEXAS CIVIC ENGAGEMENT FUND: $320k → 14%WORKERS DEFENSE PROJECT: $200k → 10%MOVE TEXAS CIVIC ENGAGEMENT FUND (FISCAL SPONSOR ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANI: $376k → 16%HOUSTON JUSTICE COALITION (FISCAL SPONSOR THE PROVIDENCE ON SOUTHMORE): $6k → 16%MOVE TEXAS CIVIC ENGAGEMENT FUND (FISCAL SPONSOR ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANI: $160k → 14%DEEDS NOT WORDS: $15k → 10%MOVE TEXAS CIVIC ENGAGEMENT FUND (FISCAL SPONSOR ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANI: $227k → 16%CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY PRIORITY DBA EVERY TEXAN: $293k → 10%CENTRO POR LA JUSTICIA: $45k → 16%YOUTH RISE TEXAS: $376k → 10%MOVE TEXAS CIVIC ENGAGEMENT FUND (FISCAL SPONSOR ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANI: $14k → 16%YOUTH RISE TEXAS: $256k → 10%RADICAL REGISTRARS: $10k → 16%YOUTH RISE TEXAS: $135k → 10%YOUTH RISE TEXAS: $16k → 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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.8M · 4 repeat orgs$1.3M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +75% since the first grant, against +67% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
13

Total granted

$4.8M
$1.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+75%
+67%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Civil RightsPublic BenefitEducationCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANIZING
    7× · 2018–2024 · $2.0M · revenue +248%
  • JA
    JOLT ACTION INC
    6× · 2018–2024 · $1.5M · revenue -37% · 57% of their budget
  • YR
    Youth Rise Texas Inc
    6× · 2018–2023 · $1.2M · revenue -97% · 31% of their budget

Funded once

  • JI
    JOLT INITIATIVEgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $376k · revenue +97% · 26% of their budget
  • CF
    Center for Public Policy Priorities
    one grant, 2023 · $293k · revenue -11%
  • WD
    WORKERS DEFENSE PROJECTgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $200k · revenue +67%
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
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
2
Progress Texas Institute

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

Civil Rights
3
Progress Texas

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

Civil Rights
4
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.

—
5
Texas Future Civic Fund

The Texas Future Civic Fund supports and elevates civic engagement efforts of organizations in Texas through grantmaking, donor education, and fundraising to ensure a healthy, fair, and reflective democracy.

Philanthropy
6
Polichic Engagement Fund

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

Civil Rights
7
American Civil Liberties Union of Texas Inc

The ACLU of Texas works with communities, at the State Capitol, and in the courts to protect and advance civil rights and civil liberties for every Texan, no exceptions.

—
8
League of Women Voters of the San Antonio Area

The League of Women Voters is a nonpartisan, grassroots organization working to protect and expand voting rights and ensure everyone is represented in our democracy. We empower voters and defend democracy through advocacy, education, and…

Civil Rights
9
Texas Clean Energy Coalition
—
10
Texas Defender Service

See Schedule OTDS fights for the end of mass incarceration and excessive punishment in Texas through direct representation, policy reform, and public education. TDS stands up for the dignity and humanity of people harmed by mass…

Civil Rights
11
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.

—
12
Texas Uu Justice Ministry

Education and training concerning social justice issues, according to Unitarian Universalist Principles and values, for Texas Unitarian Universalist congregations and for the general public.

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Oficina Legal Del Pueblo Unido Inc; the most unlike its peers is Avow Foundation for Abortion Access. 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
10/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANIZING: $1,999,249 · Civil RightsALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANIZINGJOLT INITIATIVE: $375,500 · Civil RightsJOLT INITIATIVE+3 more: $75,500 · Civil RightsJOLT ACTION INC: $1,519,749 · Human ServicesJOLT ACTION INCYouth Rise Texas Inc: $1,196,417 · Youth DevelopmentYouth Rise Texas IncCenter for Public Policy Priorities: $292,677 · Public BenefitCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC: $100,000 · Public BenefitWORKERS DEFENSE PROJECT: $200,000 · Education+1 more: $6,000 · EducationTEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK: $100,000 · OtherOFICINA LEGAL DEL PUEBLO UNIDO INC: $75,000 · Other+1 more: $6,000 · OtherCENTRO POR LA JUSTICIA: $45,000 · Community ImprovementPure Justice: $25,000 · Community ImprovementDeeds Not Words: $15,000 · International
Civil Rights$2,450,249Human Services$1,519,749Youth Development$1,196,417Public Benefit$392,677Education$206,000Other$181,000Community Improvement$70,000International$15,000

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 budgetALLIANCE FOR YOUTH ORGANIZING: $1,999,249 over 7y, 4.5% of budgetJOLT ACTION INC: $1,519,749 over 6y, 57% of budgetYouth Rise Texas Inc: $1,196,417 over 6y, 31% of budgetJOLT INITIATIVE: $375,500 over 1y, 26% of budgetCenter for Public Policy Priorities: $292,677 over 1y, 5.8% of budgetWORKERS DEFENSE PROJECT: $200,000 over 1y, 8.8% of budgetCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTEXAS FREEDOM NETWORK: $100,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetOFICINA LEGAL DEL PUEBLO UNIDO INC: $75,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetCENTRO POR LA JUSTICIA: $45,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetRadical Registrars: $44,500 over 2y, 22% of budgetPure Justice: $25,000 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetGOOD DEED CORPS: $25,000 over 1y, 9.8% of budgetDeeds Not Words: $15,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetORGANIZATION OF CHINESE AMERICANS OF GREATER HOUSTON: $6,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetAvow Foundation for Abortion Access: $6,000 over 1y, 1.1% 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.

NEO Philanthropy IncTides FoundationAmalgamated Charitabl…New Venture FundTexas Organizing Proj…Greater Houston Commu…Rockefeller Philanthr…Houston in Action Net…Windward FundThe Ford FoundationHouston in ActionTexas Organizing Proj…
NEO Philanthropy IncNY25.6× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: NEO Philanthropy Inc · Tides Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · Texas Organizing Project · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Houston in Action Network · Windward Fund · The Ford Foundation · Houston in Action · Texas Organizing Project Education Fund

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 Freedom Network Education Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Texas Freedom Network Education Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%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
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 17 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 Freedom Network Education’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