· Private foundation
The Tim and Karen Hixon Foundation
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.
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 $10k11 grants · $49k
- $10k–50k22 grants · $426k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SAN ANTONIO ZOO | $40,000 |
| PEREGRINE FUND INC | $40,000 |
| SPECIAL FORCES CHARITABLE TRUST | $40,000 |
| Austin Hatcher Foundation | $30,528 |
| TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION | $30,000 |
| CAESAR KLEBURG WILDLIFE RESEARCH INSTITUTE | $25,000 |
| NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| Texas Wildlife Association | $25,000 |
| WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY | $20,000 |
| WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC | $20,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF TEXAS | $15,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY OF IDAHO | $15,000 |
| K9s For Warriors | $10,000 |
| BAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL | $10,000 |
| BONEFISH TARPON TRUST | $10,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 70% of your 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.
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 +62% since the first grant, against -24% for the ones you funded once.
37 repeat relationships — 30 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 2 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, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k 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
- TPTHE PEREGRINE FUND INC8× · 2017–2024 · $317k · revenue +122%
- SASAN ANTONIO ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY8× · 2017–2024 · $295k · revenue +84%
- NFNATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2024 · $210k · revenue +62%
Funded once
- RBROB & BESSIE WELDER WILDLIFE FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue +48%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2022 · $15k
- LTLand Trust Allianceone grant, 2023 · $10k
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.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Coastal bend bays & estuaries program is dedicated to protecting and restoring bays and estuaries of the texas coastal bend. coastal bend bays and estuaries remain a vital part of the environmental and economic landscape by preserving and…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
Unite all americans to ensure wildlife thrives in a rapidly changing world.
The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species
Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…
Mission is to seek protection of land and water resources through restoration and conservation; and conducting education and outreach on the ecological and economic importance of natural lands. we protect land from development and protect…
We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).
To guarantee all americans quality places to hunt and fish.
Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Rob & Bessie Welder Wildlife Foundation. 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 35 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) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% 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.
37 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. 37 of the 48 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 THE PEREGRINE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds SAN ANTONIO ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE SPECIAL FORCES CHARITABLE TRUST ↗
- Who funds BAT CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds Wildlife Conservation Society ↗
- Who funds BONEFISH & TARPON TRUST INC ↗
- Who funds THE EVERGLADES FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXAS ↗
- Who funds SOUND OFF ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN HATCHER FOUNDATION FOR PEDIATRIC CANCER ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds WILD OCEANS INC ↗
- Who funds Hill Country Alliance ↗
- Who funds THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ↗
- Who funds LAST CHANCE FOREVER ↗
- Who funds ECOTRUST ↗
- Who funds DEVILS RIVER CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds TROUT UNLIMITED INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL GAME FISH ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE CONSERVATION FUND A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds ROB & BESSIE WELDER WILDLIFE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Atlantic Salmon Federation (US) Inc ↗
- Who funds GREATER EDWARDS AQUIFER ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds OPERATION COMFORT ↗
- Who funds SAN ANTONIO BOTANICAL GARDEN SOCIETY 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: Hixon Family Foundation · The Brown Foundation Inc · John & Florence Newman Foundation · Elizabeth Huth Coates Charitable Foundation of 1992 · Shield-Ayres Foundation · Alice Kleberg Reynolds Meyer Foundat A0479800 · San Antonio Area Foundation · Austin Community Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 Tim and Karen Hixon 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.
- Ecotrust — 14% of income from government
- International Game Fish Association Inc — 2% of income from government
- Western Rivers Conservancy — 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Tim and Karen Hixon Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Tim and Karen Hixon 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.