Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Wingate-Lindsey Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$401k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$75k
Largest
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.

Education$1.1MMembership Benefit$991kHuman Services$155kArts & Culture$85kHealth$75kPublic Safety & Disaster$73kInternational$50kCrime & Legal$30kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $135k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $260k
$30,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$7.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FORT BEND FAMILY HEALTH$75,000
TSTC FOUNDATION$75,000
FORT BEND HISTORY ASSOCIATION$60,000
ATTACK POVERTY$50,000
ORCHARD METHODIST CHURCH$30,000
BRAZOS ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION$30,000
CAL FARLEYS BOYS RANCH$25,000
LAMAR EDUCATIONAL AWARDS FOUNDATION$20,000
CHILD ADVOCATES OF FORT BEND$15,000
BOYS GIRLS CLUB OF GREATER HOUSTO$15,000
ISAIAH 117 HOUSE$5,000
PAMELA CATHERINE HASS MERMORIAL$1,000
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 (FY25–25, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%ISAIAH 117 HOUSE: $5k → 18%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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.5M · 12 repeat orgs$161k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
1

Total granted

$2.5M
$1k

Still filing today

67%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $160k 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
Human ServicesEducationReligionPublic Safety & DisasterArts & CultureCivil RightsOther
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

  • THE TSTC FOUNDATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $995k · revenue +119%
  • CF
    CAL FARLEY'S BOYS RANCH
    4× · 2022–2025 · $150k · revenue +6%
  • MC
    MORTON CEMETERY ASSOCIATION
    3× · 2022–2024 · $120k · revenue +87%

Funded once

  • PC
    PAMELA CATHERINE HAAS MEMORIAL FUND
    one grant, 2022 · $1k
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
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Milam County
—
2
Central Texas Children's Home

To provide family services and to provide residential child care for dependent children where there is a need to assist children and families disrupted by problems.

Human Services
3
Conroe Community Cemetery Restoration Project
Arts & Culture
4
Casa for Kids of South Central Texas Inc

To recruit, train and supervise volunteers that advocate in the best interests of abused and neglected children in court.

Housing & Shelter
5
Pioneers Rest Cemetery Association

The Pioneers Rest Cemetery Association maintains the site and history of Pioneers Rest Cemetery for the benefit of descendants and the Tarrant County community.

—
6
Texas Forestry Museum

To educate the public about forestry and preserve the history of the forestry industry.

Arts & Culture
7
Bluebonnet Childrens Center

To protect and enhance the quality of life for abused and neglected children in Medina, Real and Uvalde Counties of Texas.

Crime & Legal
8
Central Texas Hospitality House

Our mission is to meet the spiritual and practical needs of the families of prisoners. We strive to provide a safe and caring home in whichfamilies can rest while visiting loved ones currently incarcerated in the adjacent prison system.

—
9
Friends of Central Texas State Veterans Cemetery

The mission is to support projects at the central texas veterans cemetery beginning with laying a holiday wreath at each grave each year.

Human Services
10
Center for 20TH Century Texas Studies
—
11
Foster Angels of Central Texas Foundation

The organizations mission is to improve the lives of the children in foster care in central texas.

Human Services
12
Flower Hill Foundation Austin Texas
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fort Bend History Association; the most unlike its peers is Orchard Volunteer Fire Department. 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

10 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. 10 of the 17 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
4/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE TSTC FOUNDATION: $995,000 · EducationTHE TSTC FOUNDATIONORCHARD CEMETERY ASSOCIATION INC: $870,820 · ReligionORCHARD CEMETERY ASSOCIATION INCMORTON CEMETERY ASSOCIATION: $120,000 · OtherMORTON CEMETERY…FORT BEND FAMILY HEALTH: $75,000 · OtherFORT BEND FAMIL…LAMAR EDUCATIONAL AWARDS FOUNDATION: $60,250 · OtherLAMAR EDUCATION…BRAZOS ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $45,000 · OtherBRAZOS ISD EDUC…ORCHARD METHODIST CHURCH: $30,000 · OtherORCHARD METHODI…BOYS GIRLS CLUB OF GREATER HOUSTO: $25,000 · OtherBOYS GIRLS CLUB…+3 more: $6,000 · OtherCAL FARLEY'S BOYS RANCH: $150,000 · Human Services+1 more: $5,000 · Human ServicesFORT BEND HISTORY ASSOCIATION: $85,000 · Arts & CultureOrchard Volunteer Fire Department: $73,000 · Public Safety & DisasterATTACK POVERTY: $50,000 · InternationalFt Bend County Child Advocates Inc: $30,000 · Civil Rights
Education$995,000Religion$870,820Other$361,250Human Services$155,000Arts & Culture$85,000Public Safety & Disaster$73,000International$50,000Civil Rights$30,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE TSTC FOUNDATION: $995,000 over 9y, 4.7% of budgetORCHARD CEMETERY ASSOCIATION INC: $870,820 over 8y, 98% of budgetCAL FARLEY'S BOYS RANCH: $150,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetMORTON CEMETERY ASSOCIATION: $120,000 over 3y, 7.5% of budgetFORT BEND HISTORY ASSOCIATION: $85,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetOrchard Volunteer Fire Department: $73,000 over 7y, 22% of budgetLAMAR EDUCATIONAL AWARDS FOUNDATION: $60,250 over 7y, 3.8% of budgetISAIAH 117 HOUSE: $5,000 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 THE TSTC FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ORCHARD CEMETERY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CAL FARLEY'S BOYS RANCH ↗
  • Who funds MORTON CEMETERY ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds FORT BEND HISTORY ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds Orchard Volunteer Fire Department ↗
  • Who funds LAMAR EDUCATIONAL AWARDS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ATTACK POVERTY ↗
  • Who funds Ft Bend County Child Advocates Inc ↗
  • Who funds ISAIAH 117 HOUSE ↗

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.

Bert F Winston Sr FoundationTX20× affinity7 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Bert F Winston Sr Foundation · The Henderson-Wessendorff Foundation · The George Foundation · Madison Charitable Foundation Inc · Shell USA Company Foundation · Texas Mutual Insurance Company · Union Pacific Foundation · Greater Houston Community Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · 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 Wingate-Lindsey Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Wingate-Lindsey Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%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
    2report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Wingate-Lindsey Charitable Trust?

    Find your warmest path to The Wingate-Lindsey Charitable Trust 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.

    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 17 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 Wingate-Lindsey’s filings →

    More from the funding graph