· Private foundation
The Cynthia & George Mitchell Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k154 grants · $643k
- $10k–50k175 grants · $3.1M
- $50k–250k62 grants · $5.9M
- $250k+7 grants · $2.4M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Greater Houston Community Foundation | $412,792 |
| Water Foundation | $400,000 |
| Vision Galveston Inc | $400,000 |
| US Water Alliance | $315,000 |
| Texas Agricultural Land Trust | $300,000 |
| Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated | $275,000 |
| National Wildlife Federation (Austin) | $250,000 |
| The University of Texas at Austin (EI) | $212,000 |
| Hill Country Alliance | $210,000 |
| Rocky Mountain Institute | $200,000 |
| Ceres Inc | $175,000 |
| Prairie View A&M University | $175,000 |
| The Last Kilometer Corp | $160,000 |
| Hill Country Alliance | $157,000 |
| Texas AgriForestry Small Farmers and Ranchers | $150,000 |
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 (FY18–24, $1.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 92% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 16% of The Cynthia & George Mitchell Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 59% of the giving stays in TX; read by stated purpose it is 67% — more of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +41% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.
436 repeat relationships — 294 still active in FY2024, 142 since wound down; 49 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M 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
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED8× · 2017–2024 · $4.1M · revenue +202%- TATexas A&M Foundation6× · 2017–2024 · $2.9M · revenue +90%
- VGVision Galveston5× · 2020–2024 · $2.3M · revenue +3% · 62% of their budget
Funded once
- AIAUSTIN INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING PROJECT The Austin Bulldogone grant, 2023 · $225k · revenue +2%
- SRSul Ross State Univ-Borderlands Resone grant, 2020 · $210k
- BCBaylor College of Medicineone grant, 2022 · $200k · revenue +19%
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.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
Glasstire is a website about visual art in Texas. Our mission is to expand the conversation about visual art in Texas.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.
The Coastal Prairie Conservancy (CPC) works to sustain a resilient Texas by preserving coastal prairies, wetlands, farms, and ranches to benefit people and wildlife forever. Continued on Schedule OCPC conserves land, restores and enhances…
Grist is an independent, non profit media organization dedicated to reporting on climate change.
To improve the efficacy, speed, cost, sustainability, and scaling of conservation solutions through harnessing exponential technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship to prevent human-induced extinction.
To enrich life through discovery, education, and the conservation of plants and the natural environment.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Center for Family Philanthropy Inc and the most unlike its peers is Texas Clean Energy Coalition. 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 27 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.8% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
576 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. 576 of the 775 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds Texas A&M Foundation ↗
- Who funds GREATER HOUSTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Vision Galveston ↗
- Who funds Save Our Springs Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds Hill Country Alliance ↗
- Who funds WATER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TEXAS TRIBUNE INC ↗
- Who funds Houston Advanced Research Center ↗
- Who funds Rocky Mountain Institute ↗
- Who funds US WATER ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds TEXAS CLEAN ENERGY COALITION ↗
- Who funds TEXAS HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds THE ASPEN INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC CITIZEN FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Texas Agricultural Land Trust ↗
- Who funds DUKE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF GALVESTON INC WHITE ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds TEXAS WATER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NIA CULTURAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds CE BUYERS INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Build Galveston ↗
- Who funds WILDWOOD SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds WINDWARD FUND ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY LLC ↗
- Who funds CERES INC ↗
- Who funds BAYOU CITY WATERKEEPER INC ↗
- Who funds The University of Texas Law School Foundation ↗
- Who funds WATER FINANCE EXCHANGE INC ↗
- Who funds William Marsh Rice University ↗
- Who funds THE ARTIST BOAT INC ↗
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: Jacob and Terese Hershey Foundation · The Landfall Foundation Inc · Shield-Ayres Foundation · New Hanover Community Endowment Inc · Meadows Foundation Inc · Houston Endowment Inc · St David's Foundation · Water Foundation · Harris & Eliza Kempner Fund Inc · Austin Community Foundation Inc · Still Water Foundation · The Moody 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 The Cynthia & George Mitchell Foundation 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
- Ceres Inc — 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.