· Public charity
The National Leadership Foundation
None
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 21 grants below total $190,999 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $210,693 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $19,694 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k13 grants · $94k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $97k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GILL CHILDREN'S | $19,132 |
| Neuro Assistance Foundation | $12,512 |
| BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS | $12,245 |
| LINKED | $11,245 |
| MEALS ON WHEELS | $11,038 |
| BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF GREATER TARRANT COUNTY | $10,501 |
| CATHOLIC CHARITIES | $10,352 |
| COMMUNITY HEALTHCARE OF TEXAS | $10,162 |
| Texas Academy 4 | $9,570 |
| Rutledge Cancer Foundation | $9,270 |
| THE PARENTING CENTER | $8,620 |
| THE WELMAN PROJECT | $7,895 |
| CAMP JOHN MARC | $7,862 |
| WINGS OF HOPE EQUITHERAPY | $7,607 |
| RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE | $7,494 |
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 (FY17–25, $304k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% 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.
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.
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 +48% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.
24 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27k 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
- GCGILL CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC9× · 2017–2025 · $130k · revenue +103%
- MOMEALS ON WHEELS INC OF TARRANT COUNTY9× · 2017–2025 · $115k · revenue +120%
- CCCATHOLIC CHARITIES DIOCESE OF FORT WORTH9× · 2017–2025 · $87k · revenue +762%
Funded once
- SCSafe City Commissionone grant, 2019 · $13k · revenue +16%
- PPROJECTHANDUPone grant, 2020 · $6k · revenue +2%
- TWTHE WOMEN'S CENTER OF TARRANT COUNTY INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +34%
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.
To support and empower people with intellectual and developmental disabilities to improve their quality of life.
Texans Care for Children shapes public policies and brings Texans together to make children a statewide priority. We work so kids can have what they need to be healthy, secure, and thriving and so every Texan can have the best start to…
RAISE Texas advances equitable policies and programs that foster financial security and economic mobility for low- and moderate-income Texans. We equip, innovate and advocate to reduce disparities, remove barriers and build opportunities…
ConnectAbility's mission is to empower those with life altering disabilities and their caregivers to reach their fullest potential.
To build healthy families and a strong north texas community by preventing child abuse and neglect.
The mission of the Dallas-Fort Worth Hospital Council is to drive evidence-based improvement in patient care and health equity throughout the region.
See Schedule OThe Women's Resource of Greater Houston helps women and girls make choices toward becoming independent, productive, and financially stable. We fulfill our mission by recruiting volunteer instructors to deliver our programs in…
TexProtects advances public policy and local implementation to strenghten families to prevent child abuse and neglect.
Our mission is to provide quality mental health services to children and adults in low income families who are impacted by severe and persistent mental illness, emotional disturbances, child abuse and neglect, high-risk behaviors and…
To strengthen families through parenting classes educational programs, youth programs and referral services for the prevention of child abuse and neglect.
The Family Guidance & Outreach Center of Lubbock is dedicated to the prevention of child abuse and neglect and supporting, mentoring, and educating parents.
To engage and educate communities to prevent sexual violence and to support survivors and their loved ones as they heal and thrive.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Recovery Resource Council and the most unlike its peers is The Welman Project. 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 41 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 27% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 16% 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.
29 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. 29 of the 30 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
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 GILL CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS INC OF TARRANT COUNTY ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES DIOCESE OF FORT WORTH ↗
- Who funds THE PARENTING CENTER ↗
- Who funds Union Gospel Mission of Tarrant County ↗
- Who funds BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS LONE STAR ↗
- Who funds Helping Restore Ability ↗
- Who funds LEARNING CENTER OF NORTH TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE OF FORT WORTH INC ↗
- Who funds Fort Worth Airpower Foundation ↗
- Who funds Recovery Resource Council ↗
- Who funds DONT FORGET TO FEED ME PET FOOD BANK INC ↗
- Who funds FORT WORTH JUNIOR GOLF FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds A WISH WITH WINGS INC ↗
- Who funds Community Healthcare of Texas ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER TARRANT COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds THE WELMAN PROJECT ↗
- Who funds TEXAS ACADEMY 4 ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL CAMPS FOR SPECIAL KIDS ↗
- Who funds Wings of Hope Equitherapy ↗
- Who funds HOPE CENTER 4 AUTISM - FORT WORTH ↗
- Who funds KIDS WHO CARE INC ↗
- Who funds Humane Society of North Texas ↗
- Who funds Safe City Commission ↗
- Who funds NEURO ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RUTLEDGE CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PROJECTHANDUP ↗
- Who funds THE WOMEN'S CENTER OF TARRANT COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds NORTHSIDE INTERCOMMUNITY AGENCY 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: Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · Thomas M Helen McKee & John P Ryan Fo John P Ryan Foundation Inc · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Amon G Carter Foundation · Sid W Richardson Foundation · Bnsf Railway Foundation · The Morris Foundation · The Rees-Jones Foundation · Amon G Carter-Star Tele Emply Fund · United Way of Tarrant County · Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353 · America's Charities
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 National Leadership 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The National Leadership Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The National Leadership 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.