Skip to content
The Chilton Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Chilton Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$425k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0190% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Health$1.7MEducation$510kHuman Services$493kRecreation & Sports$208kCommunity Improvement$68kReligion$37kFood & Nutrition$20kArts & Culture$4kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $28k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $94k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $303k
$11,550
Median grant
2
States reached
$9.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Children's Medical Center Foundatio$200,000
University of Arkansas Empower Prog$53,300
Baylor Healthcare System Foundation$50,000
Crystal Charity Ball$45,000
Salesmanship Club Charity Golf of D$37,500
American Cancer Society$11,550
Individual grant recipient$7,000
Miss Fran's Teaching Garden$5,000
Junior League of Dallas$5,000
Salvation Army$5,000
Individual grant recipient$3,500
Baylor Scott White Dallas Foundatio$2,500
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 (FY20–22, $95k) 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%SALESMANSHIP CLUB CHARITABLE GOLF OF DALLAS INC: $35k → 14%SALESMANSHIP CLUB CHARITABLE GOLF OF DALLAS INC: $30k → 14%SALESMANSHIP CLUB CHARITABLE GOLF OF DALLAS INC: $30k → 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.
$3.0M · 18 repeat orgs$43k to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
6

Total granted

$3.0M
$40k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
+32%

Still filing today

50%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationHealthPhilanthropyHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • CM
    CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION
    2× · 2021–2022 · $400k · revenue +4%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $267k · revenue +52%
  • TC
    THE CRYSTAL CHARITY BALL
    6× · 2020–2025 · $230k · revenue +32%

Funded once

  • LL
    LOVERS LANE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
  • SC
    SENIOR CITIZENS OF GREATER DALLAS INC
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -4%
  • WC
    WILKINSON CENTER
    one grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue -11%
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
Baylor University Medical Center

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
2
Baylor All Saints Medical Center

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
3
Scott & White Healthcare Foundation

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

Health
4
Baylor Scott & White Medical Centers - Greater North Texas

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
5
Baylor Scott & White Medical Centers- Capitol Area

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
6
Baylor Scott & White Medical Center - Centennial

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
7
Baylor Regional Medical Center at Plano

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
8
Baylor Medical Center at Irving

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
9
Scott & White Hospital-College Station

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
10
Baylor Medical Center at Waxahachie

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
11
Scott & White Clinic

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
12
Scott & White Hospital-Marble Falls

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Junior League of Dallas Inc; the most unlike its peers is Miss Frans Teaching Garden. 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

13 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. 13 of the 25 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Children's Medical Center Foundatio: $600,000 · OtherChildren's Medical Center FoundatioUT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER: $407,200 · OtherUT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTERSalvation Army: $255,000 · OtherSalvation ArmyUniversity of Arkansas Empower Prog: $243,300 · OtherUniversity of Arkansas Empower ProgSalesmanship Club Charity Golf of D: $112,500 · OtherSalesmanship Club Charity Golf of D+8 more: $129,050 · Other+8 moreCHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $400,000 · HealthCHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENT…Baylor Health Care System Foundation: $139,000 · HealthBaylor Health Care Syst…Baylor Health Care System: $94,000 · HealthBaylor Health Care Syst…UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOUNDATION INC: $266,667 · EducationUNIVERSITY…Miss Frans Teaching Garden: $20,000 · EducationMiss Frans…+3 more: $10,000 · EducationTHE CRYSTAL CHARITY BALL: $230,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $2,500 · PhilanthropySalesmanship Club Charitable Golf of Dallas Inc: $95,000 · Human ServicesJUNIOR LEAGUE OF DALLAS INC: $67,500 · Community Improvement
Other$1,747,050Health$633,000Education$296,667Philanthropy$232,500Human Services$95,000Community Improvement$67,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $400,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOUNDATION INC: $266,667 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTHE CRYSTAL CHARITY BALL: $230,000 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetBaylor Health Care System Foundation: $139,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSalesmanship Club Charitable Golf of Dallas Inc: $95,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetBaylor Health Care System: $94,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetJUNIOR LEAGUE OF DALLAS INC: $67,500 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetMiss Frans Teaching Garden: $20,000 over 4y, 43% of budgetSENIOR CITIZENS OF GREATER DALLAS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDallas Theological Seminary: $4,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWILKINSON CENTER: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTEXAS STATE HISTORY MUSEUM FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGRANT HALLIBURTON FOUNDATION INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% 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 CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE CRYSTAL CHARITY BALL ↗
  • Who funds Baylor Health Care System Foundation ↗
  • Who funds Salesmanship Club Charitable Golf of Dallas Inc ↗
  • Who funds Baylor Health Care System ↗
  • Who funds JUNIOR LEAGUE OF DALLAS INC ↗
  • Who funds Miss Frans Teaching Garden ↗
  • Who funds SENIOR CITIZENS OF GREATER DALLAS INC ↗
  • Who funds Dallas Theological Seminary ↗
  • Who funds WILKINSON CENTER ↗
  • Who funds TEXAS STATE HISTORY MUSEUM FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds GRANT HALLIBURTON FOUNDATION 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.

The Dallas FoundationCommunities Foundatio…The Perot FoundationTexas Instruments Fou…The Bank of America C…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Dallas FoundationTX17.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Dallas Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · The Perot Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 The Chilton Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Chilton Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%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 · 0–25%
    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 The Chilton Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Chilton Foundation 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 25 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 Chilton’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