Skip to content
The Pat Green Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

The Pat Green Foundation

The foundation is to be administered primarily for the benefit of the ben hogan foundation & the gladney center for adoption (each being a texas non-profit corporation exempt from tax under section 501(c)(3)), or to another entity providing charitable support to ill or disadvantaged children and their families.

$135k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Recreation & Sports$259kHuman Services$223kHealth$70kEducation$55kPhilanthropy$42kYouth Development$40kHousing & Shelter$10kCommunity Improvement$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $125,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $135,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $10,000 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $100k
$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$203k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BEN HOGAN FOUNDATION$50,000
GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION$50,000
TEEN FLOW YOUTH MINISTRY$25,000
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, $210k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%THE GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION: $100k → 11%OUR CALLING INC: $5k → 14%GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION: $50k → 11%GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION: $50k → 11%THE GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION: $5k → 11%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 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
Texas Business Hall of Fame Foundation

To recognize the accomplishments and contributions of our outstanding Texas business leaders and to perpetuate and inspire the values of entrepreneurial spirit, personal integrity, and community leadership in all generations of Texans.

Community Improvement
2
Texas Food & Fuel Association Scholarship Foundation

The texas food & fuel association scholarship foundation awards scholarships to outstanding students in the state of texas.

Education
3
Texas Bar Foundation

The Foundation solicits charitable contributions and provides funding to enhance the rule of law and the system of justice in Texas, especially for programs that relate to the administration of justice; ethics in the legal profession;…

Crime & Legal
4
Texas Bankers Foundation
Education
5
Texas Agricultural Land Trust Foundation

The Foundation provides financial and other resources in support exclusively for Texas Agricultural Land Trust ("TALT"), a Texas tax exempt nonprofit corporation, classified as a 501(c)(3) organization.

Food & Nutrition
6
The Good Foundation of Texas
Philanthropy
7
Greater Texas Foundation
Education
8
Texas a&M University-Central Tx Foundati

Operated exclusively for educational purposes specifically including to further educational activities at texas a& m university-central texas within the meaning of 501(c)(3).

Education
9
Texas Builders Foundation

Texas Builders Foundation supports and develops the future of Texas construction workforce and facilitates the charitable activities of the residential construction industry.

Education
10
Texas Association of Business

As the state chamber of commerce, tab is the most influential and dominant voice for public policy issues affecting business in texas. through proven results-oriented advocacy and member services, tab develops a climate in texas which…

—
11
Tift Endowment Fund Inc

The endowment fund awards scholarships with grants from the texas international fishing tournament, inc

Education
12
Dallas College Foundation Inc

Dallas college foundation enhances the level of achievement and excellence of dallas college by providing scholarships, eliminating barriers that prevent students from attending and graduating, and supporting innovation.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Foundation of West Texas; the most unlike its peers is St John Rescue Inc. 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

19 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. 19 of the 21 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/19
Grantees still filing
14/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE BEN HOGAN FOUNDATION: $251,776 · PhilanthropyTHE BEN HOGAN FOUNDATIONCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF WEST TEXAS: $40,000 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF WEST TEXAS+2 more: $12,500 · PhilanthropyTHE GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION: $205,000 · Human ServicesTHE GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION+1 more: $5,000 · Human ServicesUniversity of Iowa Facilities Corporation: $55,000 · OtherUniversity of I…SALVATION ARMY NATIONAL CORP: $10,000 · OtherSALVATION ARMY …TEXAS AGGREGATES & CONCRETE ASSOCIATION: $10,000 · OtherTEXAS AGGREGATE…NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK: $10,000 · OtherNORTH TEXAS FOO…BUSH TENNIS CENTER: $7,500 · OtherBUSH TENNIS CEN…VIRGIN ISLANDS HOUSING MANAGEMENT INC: $5,000 · Other+1 more: $2,000 · OtherTEXAS ASPHALT PAVEMENT ASSOCIATION SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM: $50,000 · EducationTHE GEORGE W BUSH FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EducationTEEN FLOW YOUTH MINISTRY: $25,000 · ReligionST JOHN RESCUE INC: $10,000 · HealthTRIUMPH OVER KID CANCER FOUNDATION: $5,000 · HealthTICKET TO DREAM FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentTD CLUB FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentBROTHERHOOD FOR THE FALLEN DALLAS TX: $3,000 · Crime & Legal
Philanthropy$304,276Human Services$210,000Other$99,500Education$55,000Religion$25,000Health$15,000Youth Development$10,000Crime & Legal$3,000

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 budgetTHE BEN HOGAN FOUNDATION: $251,776 over 3y, 28% of budgetTHE GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION: $205,000 over 4y, 1.0% of budgetTEXAS ASPHALT PAVEMENT ASSOCIATION SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM: $50,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF WEST TEXAS: $40,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetNORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSEMPER GRATUS INC: $7,500 over 1y, 9.9% of budgetBUSH TENNIS CENTER: $7,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetOURCALLING INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE EMERIL LAGASSE FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTICKET TO DREAM FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTD CLUB FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTHE GEORGE W BUSH FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBROTHERHOOD FOR THE FALLEN DALLAS TX: $3,000 over 1y, 2.5% 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.

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.

National Philanthropi…Morgan Stanley Global…The Bank of America C…Network for GoodVanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA8.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Pat Green Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Pat Green Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 21 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 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 Pat Green’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