Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Joyce Nies and Peter Witt Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$183k
Granted FY2024still arriving
22
Grants FY2024still arriving
8
States reached
$40k
Largest
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Housing & Shelter$72kHuman Services$67kArts & Culture$38kCrime & Legal$33kFood & Nutrition$27kEducation$22kInternational$15kCivil Rights$14kOther$0
02FY2024 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k16 grants · $57k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $126k
$5,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BCS HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$40,000
TAMU - ART FUND$25,000
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS FOUNDATION$20,000
METHODIST RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES FO$18,050
BRAZOS VALLEY FOOD BANK$13,000
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN$10,000
TINY HOPE VILLAGE$9,500
BRAZOS INTERFAITH IMMIGRATION NETWO$9,000
VOICES FOR CHILDREN$5,025
UNLIMITED POTENTIAL OF BV$5,008
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER$5,000
OXFAM AMERICA$5,000
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS USA$5,000
UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST CHURCH OF BV$4,950
NATURE CONSERVANCY$3,000
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 (FY17–24, $39k) land where the poverty rate runs at 22%, 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%UNLIMITED POTENTIAL OF BV: $5k → 22%UNLIMITED POTENTAIL OF BV: $1k → 22%UNLIMITED POTENTIAL OF BV: $83 → 22%UNLIMITED POTENTIAL OF BV: $25 → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $11k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $7k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $6k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $5k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $2k → 22%VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $1k → 22%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.

Which US states its grants reach

AK
IL
NY
MA
OR
CA
VA
MD
DC
AL
TX
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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$240k · 29 repeat orgs$85k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +39% since the first grant, against +17% for those funded once.

29 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2024, 16 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

29
33

Total granted

$240k
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+17%

Still filing today

45%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $70k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Arts & CultureInternationalEducationEnvironmentHuman ServicesCrime & LegalOther
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

  • VF
    Voices for Children Inc
    6× · 2017–2024 · $32k · revenue +77%
  • BV
    BRAZOS VALLEY FOOD BANK INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $27k · revenue +39%
  • TH
    TINY HOPE VILLAGE
    4× · 2019–2024 · $19k · revenue +134%

Funded once

  • R
    REACH
    one grant, 2020 · $3k
  • RA
    ROGUE ACTION CENTER
    one grant, 2020 · $3k · revenue -16%
  • CI
    CANE ISLAND KATY INC
    one grant, 2023 · $1k
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
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
2
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
3
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
4
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.

—
5
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
6
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
7
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

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.

Crime & Legal
8
Aclu Foundation of Texas Inc

The ACLU Foundation of Texas is the unyielding guardian and promoter of freedom, justice, equality and dignity of all people, particularly for those who are still fighting to secure the full exercise of their civil rights and liberties.…

Civil Rights
9
Toxic-Free Future F/K/a Washington Toxics Coalition

As a national leader in environmental health research and advocacy, toxic- free future uses the power of science, education, and activism, to drive strong laws and corporate responsibility that protect the health of all people and the…

Environment
10
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
11
Houston Botanic Garden

To enrich life through discovery, education, and the conservation of plants and the natural environment.

Environment
12
Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated; the most unlike its peers is Brazos Valley Troupe. 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

30 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 30 of the 72 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
30/30
Grantees still filing
20/30
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BCS HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $52,500 · OtherBCS HABITAT FOR HUMANITYTAMU - ART FUND: $25,000 · OtherTAMU - ART FUNDBRAZOS INTERFAITH IMMIGRATION NETWO: $22,000 · OtherBRAZOS INTERFAITH IMMIGRATION NETWOMETHODIST RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES FO: $21,050 · OtherMETHODIST RETIREMENT COMMUNITIES FOPROJECT UNITY: $6,595 · OtherBrazos Valley Troupe: $10,150 · OtherBrazos Valley Troupe+54 more: $50,975 · Other+54 moreVoices for Children Inc: $32,444 · Human ServicesVoices for Ch…Unlimited Potential Inc: $6,116 · Human ServicesUnlimited Pot…BRAZOS VALLEY FOOD BANK INC: $27,475 · Food & NutritionBRAZOS VA…University of Illinois Foundation: $20,000 · EducationTIDELINES INSTITUTE: $3,500 · Education+1 more: $25 · EducationWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $10,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $6,500 · InternationalOXFAM-AMERICA INC: $5,000 · InternationalTINY HOPE VILLAGE: $19,000 · Housing & ShelterSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $12,450 · Crime & LegalHARRIETT BUHAI CENTER FOR FAMILY LAW: $500 · Crime & Legal
Other$188,270Human Services$38,560Food & Nutrition$27,475Education$23,525International$21,500Housing & Shelter$19,000Crime & Legal$12,950

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetVoices for Children Inc: $32,444 over 6y, 1.2% of budgetBRAZOS VALLEY FOOD BANK INC: $27,475 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetUniversity of Illinois Foundation: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTINY HOPE VILLAGE: $19,000 over 4y, 6.9% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $12,450 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $6,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUnlimited Potential Inc: $6,116 over 4y, 1.7% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE BRAZOS VALLEY: $5,600 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetOXFAM-AMERICA INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTIDELINES INSTITUTE: $3,500 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetROGUE ACTION CENTER: $3,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetBrazos Valley Museum of Natural History: $1,150 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTHE THEATRE COMPANY OF BCS: $1,100 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetABRAHAM LINCOLN BRIGADE ARCHIVES INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHARRIETT BUHAI CENTER FOR FAMILY LAW: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF CHAMBER MUSIC: $300 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $300 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $160 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $135 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $80 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHouston Grand Opera Association Inc: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $35 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAUSTIN SHAKESPEARE FESTIVAL CO INC: $25 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDefenders of Wildlife: $25 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR ECTODERMAL DYSPLASIAS: $25 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTexas A&M Foundation: $25 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Voices for Children Inc ↗
  • Who funds BRAZOS VALLEY FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds University of Illinois Foundation ↗
  • Who funds TINY HOPE VILLAGE ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds Brazos Valley Troupe ↗
  • Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds Unlimited Potential Inc ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE BRAZOS VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds OXFAM-AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds TIDELINES INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds ROGUE ACTION CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Brazos Valley Museum of Natural History ↗
  • Who funds THE THEATRE COMPANY OF BCS ↗
  • Who funds THE ACADEMY OF LEISURE SCIENCES ↗
  • Who funds MARCH FOR LIFE ACTION ↗
  • Who funds ABRAHAM LINCOLN BRIGADE ARCHIVES INC ↗
  • Who funds HARRIETT BUHAI CENTER FOR FAMILY LAW ↗

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.

B Don & Becky Russell Charitable FoundatTX17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: B Don & Becky Russell Charitable Foundat · Winkler Nina Astin Trust · Edge Eugene III Charitable Trust · Nina Heard Astin Charitable Trust · Mervin and Annete Peters Family Foundation · M Bookman Peters Charitable Foundation · Gilbert & Thyra Plass Charitable Trust · Orr Waldon H and Adele Charitable Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good

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 Joyce Nies and Peter Witt Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Joyce Nies and Peter Witt Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 29%
  • Rogue Action Center: 29% of income from government
  • Oxfam-America Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 Joyce Nies and Peter Witt Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Joyce Nies and Peter Witt 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 72 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Joyce Nies and Peter Witt’s filings →

More from the funding graph