Skip to content
The Windmill Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Windmill Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$110k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$30k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its 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 2025.

Food & Nutrition$225kHuman Services$197kInternational$192kAnimals$177kEducation$90kCrime & Legal$80kHealth$28kPhilanthropy$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $100k
$15,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE$30,000
HEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA$25,000
MEALS ON WHEELS$20,000
PALUXY RIVER CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER$15,000
HAPPY HILL FARM$10,000
FRIEND OF RESCUE ANIMALS$5,000
HUMANE SOCIETY OF NORTH TEXAS$5,000
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 (FY17–25, $704k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 66% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $30k → 6%COMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY OF MCKINNEY: $10k → 5%HEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA: $25k → 14%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $25k → 6%COMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY OF MCKINNEY: $10k → 5%HEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA: $25k → 14%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $25k → 6%COMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY OF MCKINNEY: $10k → 5%HEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA: $25k → 14%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $25k → 6%COMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY OF MCKINNEY: $10k → 5%HEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA: $25k → 14%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $24k → 6%COMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY OF MCKINNEY: $5k → 5%HEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA: $24k → 14%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $20k → 6%HAPPY HILL FARM: $10k → 10%HEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA: $20k → 14%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $18k → 6%HAPPY HILL FARM: $10k → 10%HEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA: $18k → 14%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $15k → 6%HEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA: $15k → 14%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $15k → 6%HAPPY HILL FARM: $10k → 10%HEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA: $15k → 14%NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS ACADEMY: $10k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $30k → 11%HAPPY HILL FARM: $10k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $30k → 11%HAPPY HILL FARM: $10k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $25k → 11%HAPPY HILL FARM: $10k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $25k → 11%HAPPY HILL FARM: $10k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $20k → 11%HAPPY HILL FARM: $10k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $20k → 11%MEALS ON WHEELS: $20k → 11%MEALS ON WHEELS: $10k → 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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 20% of The Windmill Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 74% of the giving stays in TX; by stated purpose, 52%.

The Windmill Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 19% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
$976k · 11 repeat orgs$28k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
4

Total granted

$976k
$28k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
+40%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHuman ServicesPhilanthropyCrime & LegalPublic BenefitHealthOther
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

  • MO
    MEALS ON WHEELS
    8× · 2018–2025 · $180k · revenue +23%
  • HS
    Humane Society of North Texas
    9× · 2017–2025 · $97k · revenue +40%
  • PR
    PALUXY RIVER CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER INC
    6× · 2019–2025 · $80k · revenue +164%

Funded once

  • SO
    SPCA of Texas
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue -6%
  • OK
    OPERATION KINDNESSgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +240%
  • JUDICIAL WATCH INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue +40%
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
Humane Animal Partners

Founded in 2023, humane animal partners is a nonprofit no-kill animal care and adoption center. we are committed to providing for the needs of homeless and owned dogs and cats in our community. we make "friends for life" by connecting…

Animals
2
Tulsa Spca

The Tulsa SPCA's mission is to improve the lives of dogs and cats, and their human companions.

Animals
3
Progressive Animal Welfare Society aka Paws

A champion for animals since 1967, PAWS is a nationally recognized leader - rehabilitating injured and orphaned wildlife, sheltering and adopting homeless cats and dogs, and educating people to make a better world for animals and people.

Animals
4
San Antonio Pets Alive Inc

The mission of San Antonio Pets Alive! is to save every adoptable dog and cat in danger of being killed at the City of San Antonio Shelter.

Animals
5
Houston Pets Alive

Houston Pets Alive!s (HPA!) mission is to save the lives of at-risk companion cats and dogs and find them loving homes.

Animals
6
Animal Friends Rescue Project

The Organization is dedicated to finding life-long loving homes for stray, abandoned and abused cats and dogs. The Organization concentrates on networking with other animal welfare agencies in the county and throughout the state to provide…

Human Services
7
Partners for Animal Welfare Society

Animal shelter for the protection and care of abused and neglected animals.

Animals
8
Defenders of Animal Rights Inc

Animal rescues. pet adoption center. shelter cruelty victims. farm animals. wildlife refuge. spay/neuter. humane education. youth work. grief counseling. human health via pets.

Animals
9
One Tail At a Time West Texas

One tail at a time west texas otat wtx serves the rural communities of west texas by supporting animal shelter operations rescuing and sheltering homeless unwanted companion animals dogs and cats primarily arranging their veterinary care…

Animals
10
Pet Network Humane Society

Pet Network rescues adoptable animals from euthanasia, connects abandoned animals with loving families, instills respect for animals through humane education, and enhances lives through animal companionship.

Animals
11
Friends of Homeless Animals

Dedicated to saving homeless dogs and cats, foha provides rescue, medical care, and adoption services in the washington dc metropolitan region. more than 17,500 cats and dogs have found a safe haven with friends of homeless animals for…

Animals
12
The Animal Haven Inc

The animal haven's misson is to provide a temporary, safe, caring and humane refuge for homeless dogs and cats and place these animals in quality adoptive homes.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Spca of Texas; the most unlike its peers is Meals On Wheels. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
10/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $197,000 · Human ServicesCANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFEHEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA: $192,000 · Human ServicesHEARTS ACROSS ROMANIAMEALS ON WHEELS: $180,000 · Human ServicesMEALS ON WHEELSHAPPY HILL FARM CHILDRENS HOME INC: $90,000 · Human ServicesHAPPY HILL FARM CHILDRENS HOME INCCOMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY: $45,000 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY FOOD PANTRYHumane Society of North Texas: $97,000 · AnimalsHumane Society of No…ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $47,500 · AnimalsANIMAL WELFARE INSTI…SPCA of Texas: $10,000 · AnimalsSPCA of TexasOPERATION KINDNESS: $10,000 · AnimalsOPERATION KINDNESSFRIENDS OF RESCUE ANIMALS: $10,000 · AnimalsFRIENDS OF RESCUE AN…+1 more: $2,500 · AnimalsPALUXY RIVER CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $79,500 · Crime & LegalVISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS: $27,500 · HealthFREEDOM FROM HUNGER: $10,000 · PhilanthropyJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $5,000 · Public Benefit
Human Services$704,000Animals$177,000Crime & Legal$79,500Health$27,500Philanthropy$10,000Public Benefit$5,000

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 budgetCANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $197,000 over 9y, 1.9% of budgetHEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA: $192,000 over 9y, 64% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS: $180,000 over 8y, 24% of budgetHumane Society of North Texas: $97,000 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetHAPPY HILL FARM CHILDRENS HOME INC: $90,000 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetPALUXY RIVER CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $79,500 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $47,500 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY: $45,000 over 5y, 6.1% of budgetVISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS: $27,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSPCA of Texas: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF RESCUE ANIMALS: $10,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetFREEDOM FROM HUNGER: $10,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTRRAC INC: $2,500 over 1y, 1.0% 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 CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE ↗
  • Who funds HEARTS ACROSS ROMANIA ↗
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS ↗
  • Who funds Humane Society of North Texas ↗
  • Who funds HAPPY HILL FARM CHILDRENS HOME INC ↗
  • Who funds PALUXY RIVER CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY ↗
  • Who funds VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS ↗
  • Who funds SPCA of Texas ↗
  • Who funds OPERATION KINDNESS ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF RESCUE ANIMALS ↗
  • Who funds FREEDOM FROM HUNGER ↗
  • Who funds JUDICIAL WATCH INC ↗
  • Who funds TRRAC 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.

Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Jpmorgan Chase FoundationNY10.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Windmill Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Windmill Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%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
    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 · 0–5%
    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 15 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Windmill’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