Skip to content

· Private foundation

The LRW Charitable Trust

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$195k
Granted FY2022
17
Grants FY2022
7
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Religion$520kHealth$275kHuman Services$52kEducation$42kAnimals$37kYouth Development$13kFood & Nutrition$3kPhilanthropy$2kOther$0
02FY2022 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k14 grants · $43k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
$3,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$2.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
OBLATE SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY$100,000
SAN ANTONIO LIFETIME RECOVERY$35,000
SAN ANTONIO LIFETIME RECOVERY$15,000
GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY$5,000
ST. FRANCIS RESCUE NACOGDOCHES$3,000
JEWISH FAMILY AND CAREER SERVICES$3,000
SHRINERS HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN$3,000
NACOGDOCHES HOPE FOOD PANTRY$3,000
CENTER THE HELPING HOUSE$3,000
SALVATION ARMY$3,000
SAFE HAVEN EQUINE RESCUE HOME$3,000
HUMANE SOCIETY OF NACOGDOCHES$3,000
ST JUDES CHILDREN AND RESEARCH HOSPITAL$3,000
MARINE TOYS FOR TOTS$3,000
SPCA OF SOUTH TEXAS$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 (FY17–21, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%JEWISH FAMILY AND CAREER SERVICES: $2k → 14%JEWISH FAMILY AND CAREER SERVICES: $2k → 14%JEWISH FAMILY AND CAREER SERVICES: $2k → 14%JEWISH FAMILY AND CAREER SERVICES: $2k → 14%JEWISH FAMILY AND CAREER SERVICES: $2k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

WV
MD
KS
TN
DC
LA
GA
TX
FL
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$911k · 15 repeat orgs$32k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +62% since the first grant, against +29% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2022, 8 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
3

Total granted

$911k
$6k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%
+29%

Still filing today

67%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $26k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
HealthAnimalsEducationHuman ServicesEnvironmentOther
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

  • OS
    OBLATE SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY
    6× · 2017–2022 · $520k · revenue +56%
  • SA
    SAN ANTONIO LIFETIME RECOVERY INC DBA LIFETIME RECOVERY
    4× · 2019–2022 · $200k · revenue +150%
  • AI
    ASHLEY INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $50k · revenue +62%

Funded once

  • CF
    CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $3k · revenue +29%
  • SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDRENgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +126%
  • WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC
    one grant, 2021 · $1k · revenue -10%
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
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

The aspca's mission, as stated by founder henry bergh in 1866, is "to provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the united states." the aspca was founded on the belief that animals are entitled to kind and…

Animals
2
The San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

To ensure every companion animal has access to quality medical care, compassionate shelter, and a loving home.

Animals
3
Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute

Sanford burnham prebys medical discovery institute's mission is to advance the biomedical sciences by cultivating the next generation of scientific leaders, providing meaningful opportunities for researchers of all backgrounds to learn,…

Health
4
San Diego Humane Society and Spca

Create a more humane world by inspiring compassion, providing hope and advancing the welfare of animals and people.

Animals
5
New York University

Nyu is a private university with approximately 60,000 matriculating students in 20 schools and institutes. nyu's primary missions are education, research and scholarship, and patient care.

Education
6
New York Society for the Relief of the Ruptured and Crippled Maintaining the

The mission of hospital for special surgery is to provide the highest quality patient care, improve mobility, and enhance the quality of life for all and to advance the science of orthopedic surgery, rheumatology, and their related…

Health
7
Southern California University of Health Sciences

The mission of southern california university of health sciences (scu) is to educate students as competent, caring and successful practitioners of integrative healthcare. the university is committed to providing excellence in academics,…

Education
8
Baylor Research Institute

To improve the care and well being of our community, nationally and internationally, through innovative clinically relevant research that is consistent with the mission, vision and values of Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH).

Health
9
Ssm Health Care of Oklahoma Inc

Through our exceptional health care services, we reveal the healing presence of god.

Health
10
Children's Health Care

We champion the health needs of children and families. we are committed to improving children's health by providing the highest-quality, family centered care, advanced through research and education.

Health
11
The Methodist Hospital

To provide high quality, cost-effective health care that delivers the best value to the people we serve in a spiritual environment of caring in association with internationally recognized teaching and research.

Health
12
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center

Fred hutch cancer center ("fred hutch") unites innovative research and compassionate care to prevent and eliminate cancer and infectious disease. continued on schedule o

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ashley Inc; the most unlike its peers is Safe Haven Equine & Retirement Home. 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

15 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. 15 of the 28 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
9/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OBLATE SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY: $520,000 · EducationOBLATE SCHOOL OF THEOLOGYGEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: $38,000 · EducationGEORGETOWN UNIVERSITYSAN ANTONIO LIFETIME RECOVERY INC DBA LIFETIME RECOVERY: $200,000 · HealthSAN ANTONIO LIFETIME RECOVERY I…ASHLEY INC: $50,000 · HealthASHLEY INCST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $10,000 · Health+2 more: $4,500 · HealthSALVATION ARMY: $13,000 · OtherMARINE TOYS FOR TOTS: $13,000 · OtherBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB: $10,000 · OtherSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $4,000 · OtherA KIDS CHOICE FOUNDATION: $4,000 · OtherSAFE HAVEN EQUINE RESCUE HOME: $3,000 · OtherSHRINERS HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN: $3,000 · OtherNACOGDOCHES HOPE FOOD PANTRY: $3,000 · OtherHUMANE SOCIETY OF NACOGDOCHES: $3,000 · OtherCENTER THE HELPING HOUSE: $3,000 · OtherST JUDES CHILDREN AND RESEARCH HOSPITAL: $3,000 · OtherSPCA OF SOUTH TEXAS: $3,000 · Other+1 more: $2,000 · OtherJEWISH FAMILY & CAREER SERVICES INC: $13,000 · Human ServicesWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $13,000 · Human ServicesSPCA OF EAST TEXAS INC: $10,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF NACOGDOCHES COUNT: $8,500 · AnimalsSAFE HAVEN EQUINE & RETIREMENT HOME: $4,000 · AnimalsST FRANCIS RESCUE NACOGDOCHES: $3,000 · AnimalsGREATER HOUSTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,000 · PhilanthropyWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $1,000 · Environment
Education$558,000Health$264,500Other$67,000Human Services$26,000Animals$25,500Philanthropy$2,000Environment$1,000

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 budgetOBLATE SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY: $520,000 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetSAN ANTONIO LIFETIME RECOVERY INC DBA LIFETIME RECOVERY: $200,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetASHLEY INC: $50,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetGEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY: $38,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY & CAREER SERVICES INC: $13,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $13,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetSPCA OF EAST TEXAS INC: $10,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $10,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF NACOGDOCHES COUNT: $8,500 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetSAFE HAVEN EQUINE & RETIREMENT HOME: $4,000 over 3y, 3.4% of budgetST FRANCIS RESCUE NACOGDOCHES: $3,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetCYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER HOUSTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $1,000 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 OBLATE SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY ↗
  • Who funds SAN ANTONIO LIFETIME RECOVERY INC DBA LIFETIME RECOVERY ↗
  • Who funds ASHLEY INC ↗
  • Who funds GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FAMILY & CAREER SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds SPCA OF EAST TEXAS INC ↗
  • Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
  • Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY OF NACOGDOCHES COUNT ↗
  • Who funds SAFE HAVEN EQUINE & RETIREMENT HOME ↗
  • Who funds ST FRANCIS RESCUE NACOGDOCHES ↗
  • Who funds CYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds GREATER HOUSTON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND 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.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 LRW Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The LRW Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Shriners Hospitals for Children: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
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.

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 28 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $197k of grant expense with no grantee named in the published copy. A private foundation itemizes every grant it makes, so a return carrying none has filed its list as an attachment that the public copy does not include. The figures above are therefore from FY2022, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on LRW’s filings →

More from the funding graph