Skip to content
Tom T East Sr and Alice K East and Alice H East and Robert C East Wildlife Fnd at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Tom T East Sr and Alice K East and Alice H East and Robert C East Wildlife Fnd

The East Foundation is an Agricultural Research Organization.

$239k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$73k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Animals$1.6MEducation$345kEnvironment$272kScience & Tech$184kArts & Culture$123kFood & Nutrition$48kYouth Development$43kOther$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $216,044, the rows itemized in this filing. The $238,744 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $22,700 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $122k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $73k
$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$528M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
King Ranch Institute for Ranch Management$73,000
Individual grant recipient$38,000
Individual grant recipient$29,000
IDEA Public Schools$19,544
Witte Museum$15,000
Texas Wildlife Association Foundation Inc$10,000
Texas Foundation for Conservation$10,000
Jim Hogg County Fair Association$9,500
Jim Hogg County ISD$6,000
Texas A&M University$6,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 92% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%Texas Wildlife Association Fdn: $75k → 7%Kenedy County: $38k → 8%Texas Foundation for Conservation: $10k → 10%Witte Museum: $100k → 16%Coastal Bend Community Foundation: $6k → 17%Texas A&M University: $6k → 22%IDEA Camp Rio: $40k → 23%Texas A&M University - Kingsville: $96k → 27%Jim Hogg County Fair Association: $17k → 27%IDEA Public Schools: $100k → 27%Willacy County: $29k → 29%Texas Wildlife Association Foundation Inc: $23k → 7%Kenedy County: $38k → 8%Taking Care of Texas: $25k → 10%Witte Museum: $15k → 16%Texas A&M University - Kingsville: $88k → 27%Jim Hogg County Fair Association: $17k → 27%IDEA Public Schools: $80k → 27%Texas Wildlife Association Foundation Inc: $10k → 7%Witte Museum: $15k → 16%King Ranch Institute for Ranch Management: $73k → 27%Jim Hogg County Fair Association: $10k → 27%IDEA Public Schools: $77k → 27%Diamond Bar Conservation: $1.6M → 16%Texas AM University Kingsville: $48k → 27%Jim Hogg County Fair Association: $9k → 27%IDEA Public Schools: $40k → 27%Texas Wildlife Association Fdn: $73k → 16%TAMUK Foundation Inc: $9k → 27%Jim Hogg County ISD: $6k → 27%IDEA Public Schools: $20k → 27%Texas Wildlife Association Fdn: $71k → 16%Texas Wildlife Association Foundati: $67k → 16%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.

39%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.1M · 6 repeat orgs$1.8M to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
6

Total granted

$1.1M
$1.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+44%
+136%

Still filing today

50%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $51k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentEducationAnimalsArts & CultureOther
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

  • IP
    IDEA Public Schools
    5× · 2021–2025 · $356k · revenue +44%
  • TA
    Texas A&M University Kingsville
    3× · 2021–2025 · $257k
  • FF
    FOUNDATION FOR TX WILDLIFE
    5× · 2021–2025 · $251k · revenue -51%

Funded once

  • DB
    Diamond Bar Conservation
    one grant, 2024 · $1.6M · 97% of their budget
  • TW
    Texas Wildlife Association Foundati
    one grant, 2020 · $67k
  • TA
    Texas AM University Kingsville
    one grant, 2020 · $48k
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
Parks and Wildlife Foundation of Texas

Texas Parks and Wildlife Foundation (TPWF) is a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization thatadvances Texas proud outdoor traditions through meaningful, high-impact programs,partnerships, and a wide range of projects that conserve and enhance our…

Environment
2
Texas a&M Research Foundation

To facilitate research and development within the texas a&m university system and selected other entities.

Education
3
Texas Prairieland Foundation
Philanthropy
4
Conservation History Association of Tx

The Association is developing, distributing and archiving oral histories, atlas maps and descriptive essays, and wildlife illustrations to expand public appreciation and grasp of Texas environmental history.

Education
5
Texas Land Conservancy

To conserve natural areas in Texas and to protect the physical and ecological integrity of their wildlife habitat, native plant communities, and scenic landscapes for the benefit of present and future generations.

Environment
6
Texas Food & Wine Alliance fka Austin F&W Alliance

Texas Food & Wine Alliance is dedicated to fostering awareness and innovation in the Texas culinary community through grants, educational programing, and events.

—
7
Big Bend Conservation Alliance

Conservation of West Texas Resources

Environment
8
Texas Water Foundation

Texas water foundation is a statewide nonprofit that provides educational resources and educational services on water in texas for decision makers, water professionals, and everyday texans. texas water foundation works in the areas of…

Environment
9
Coastal Prairie Conservancy

The Coastal Prairie Conservancy (CPC) works to sustain a resilient Texas by preserving coastal prairies, wetlands, farms, and ranches to benefit people and wildlife forever. Continued on Schedule OCPC conserves land, restores and enhances…

Environment
10
Texas Land Trust Council

To support texas land trusts and promote land conservation efforts in texas. host texas land conservation conference to educate conservation related professionals and volunteers from across the state.

Environment
11
Hill Country Alliance

The mission of the Hill Country Alliance is to bring together a diverse coalition of partners to preserve the open spaces, starry night skies, clean and abundant waters, and unique character of the Texas Hill Country.

Environment
12
Cca Texas Fund

To support coastal conservation association in carrying out the charitable and educational purpose for which it was organized and is operated, namely, promoting and advancing the preservation, conservation and protection of marine, plant…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Foundation for Tx Wildlife; the most unlike its peers is Jim Hogg County Fair Association. 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Diamond Bar Conservation: $1,553,369 · EnvironmentDiamond Bar Conservation+1 more: $25,000 · EnvironmentTexas A&M University Kingsville: $257,000 · OtherTexas A&M University …Individual grant recipient: $75,730 · OtherIndividual grant reci…Texas Wildlife Association Foundati: $67,450 · OtherTexas Wildlife Associ…JIM HOGG COUNTY FAIR ASSOCIATION: $52,851 · OtherJIM HOGG COUNTY FAIR …Texas AM University Kingsville: $48,000 · OtherTexas AM University K…Individual grant recipient: $29,000 · Other+3 more: $20,000 · OtherIDEA Public Schools: $355,552 · EducationIDEA Public Sc…+1 more: $9,000 · EducationFOUNDATION FOR TX WILDLIFE: $251,104 · AnimalsFOUNDATION…Texas Foundation for Conservation: $10,000 · AnimalsWitte Museum: $130,000 · Arts & CultureCOASTAL BEND COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $6,000 · Philanthropy
Environment$1,578,369Other$550,031Education$364,552Animals$261,104Arts & Culture$130,000Philanthropy$6,000

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 budgetDiamond Bar Conservation: $1,553,369 over 1y, 97% of budgetIDEA Public Schools: $355,552 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR TX WILDLIFE: $251,104 over 5y, 3.5% of budgetWitte Museum: $130,000 over 3y, 3.0% of budgetTaking Care of Texas: $25,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetTexas Foundation for Conservation: $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetTexas A&M University - Kingsville Foundation Inc: $9,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRanching Heritage Association: $8,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCOASTAL BEND COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $6,000 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.

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.

Natl Christian Charit…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA8.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn 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 Tom T East Sr and Alice K East and Alice H East and Robert C East Wildlife Fnd funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tom T East Sr and Alice K East and Alice H East and Robert C East Wildlife Fnd. 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%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 Tom T East Sr and Alice K East and Alice H East and Robert C East Wildlife Fnd?

    Find your warmest path to Tom T East Sr and Alice K East and Alice H East and Robert C East Wildlife Fnd 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 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 Tom T East Sr and Alice K East and Alice H East and Robert C East Wildlife Fnd’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