· Private foundation
Theodore and Beulah Beasley Foundation Inc
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 62% of THEODORE AND BEULAH BEASLEY FOUNDATION INC’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k15 grants · $86k
- $10k–50k54 grants · $1.0M
- $50k–250k27 grants · $2.1M
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK | $250,000 |
| CENTRAL COMMONS CHURCH | $150,000 |
| AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY | $150,000 |
| GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF DALLAS | $125,000 |
| DALLAS AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY | $125,000 |
| CHILD CARE GROUP | $100,000 |
| TEXAS WOMEN'S FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| ENVISION DALLAS | $100,000 |
| CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| UT MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER | $75,000 |
| SCHOLARSHOT | $75,000 |
| AUSTIN STREET CENTER | $75,000 |
| ENCORE PARK DALLAS | $75,000 |
| DALLAS CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER | $70,000 |
| GILMONT CAMP & CONFERENCE CENTER | $70,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $1.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 98% 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 +23% since the first grant, against +5% for the ones you funded once.
105 repeat relationships — 64 still active in FY2024, 41 since wound down; 32 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, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $906k 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
- NTNORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK5× · 2020–2024 · $1.0M · revenue +35%
- PEPARISH EPISCOPAL SCHOOL3× · 2020–2022 · $520k · revenue +29%
- THTexas Health Resources Foundation4× · 2020–2024 · $313k · revenue +73%
Funded once
- DODISCIPLES OF DIVINITY HOUSEone grant, 2020 · $140k
- DZDALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INCone grant, 2023 · $125k · revenue +5%
- DCDALLAS COUNTY MENTAL HEALTH & MENTAL RETARDATION CENTERone grant, 2023 · $100k
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.
Downtown Dallas, Inc. (DDI), is the champion of a clean and safe Downtown and of the economic development and vibrancy of this community of diverse, unique neighborhoods. DDI: Mobilizes and amplifies the services of public agencies.…
As a christian university, we provide education and research opportunities preparing global leaders to partner with local communities.
To engage and educate communities to prevent sexual violence and to support survivors and their loved ones as they heal and thrive.
The mission of Dallas Services is to enable individuals with disabilities and other special needs to achieve their potential by fostering community inclusiveness and independence.
The mission of the Dallas-Fort Worth Hospital Council is to drive evidence-based improvement in patient care and health equity throughout the region.
The mission of the dallas county medical society is to promote public health and advocate for physicians and their relationship with patients, while upholding professionalism in the practice of medicine.
The foundation's mission is to strengthen and support faith communities by partnering wise investments with purposeful giving.
To unify services across Dallas County, to empower youth, strengthen families and build safe, healthy communities.
The dcms foundation's mission is to improve the quality and distribution of health services throughout dallas county.
To support the mission of Dallas Theological Seminary by offering charitable planned giving and other related services to friends of the Seminary.
To provide individualized services that positively impact the lives of 0-3 year old children with developmental disabilities/delays and their families.
Downtown Dallas, Inc. Foundation is the charitable arm of Downtown Dallas, Inc. whose purpose is to help make the area in and around Downtown Dallas a more vibrant and livable place for both daytime and permanent residents by promoting the…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dallas Children's Advocacy Center and the most unlike its peers is Onesight Essilorluxottica Foundation Fund. 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 39 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) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.8% lost their exemption, against 18% 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.
125 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. 125 of the 173 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 NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds PARISH EPISCOPAL SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds DALLAS COUNTY HERITAGE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds Dallas Area Habitat for Humanity Inc ↗
- Who funds Texas Health Resources Foundation ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN STREET CENTER ↗
- Who funds PARKLAND FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Texas Women's Foundation ↗
- Who funds DALLAS CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds CHILDCAREGROUP ↗
- Who funds SCHOLARSHOT ↗
- Who funds BUCKNER CHILDREN & FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds MY POSSIBILITIES ↗
- Who funds VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS ↗
- Who funds YMCA OF METROPOLITAN DALLAS INC ↗
- Who funds SENIOR CITIZENS OF GREATER DALLAS INC ↗
- Who funds RETINA FOUNDATION OF THE SOUTHWEST ↗
- Who funds BETHANY COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds FOR OAK CLIFF ↗
- Who funds DALLAS ARBORETUM AND BOTANICAL SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds BRITE DIVINITY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds Goodwill Industries of Dallas Inc ↗
- Who funds DALLAS CHILDRENS THEATER INC ↗
- Who funds DALLAS ZOO MANAGEMENT INC ↗
- Who funds THE WARREN CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CAMP SUMMIT INC ↗
- Who funds THE MACMILLAN INSTITUTE ↗
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: The Dallas Foundation · Hillcrest Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · W P & Bulah Luse Foundation · The Rees-Jones Foundation · The Moody Foundation · United Way of Metropolitan Dallas Inc · Hoblitzelle Foundation · Katherine C Carmody Charitable Tuw · The Perot Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · Texas Women's Foundation
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 Theodore and Beulah Beasley Foundation Inc 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 Theodore and Beulah Beasley Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Theodore and Beulah Beasley Foundation Inc 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.