Skip to content

· Private foundation

W B and Ellen Gordon Stuart Trust Xxxxx1009

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$600k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$112k
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, FY2018 to 2025.

Health$3.9MRecreation & Sports$571kReligion$90kEducation$75kMembership Benefit$180
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k8 grants · $208k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $392k
$30,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WI COOK FOUNDATION INC$112,011
AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION$80,000
CAMP SUMMIT INC$80,000
MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC$60,000
ALL SAINTS HEALTH FOUNDATION$60,000
CANCER CARE SERVICES$45,000
RUTLEDGE CANCER FOUNDATION$30,000
TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES FOUNDATION$30,000
CAREITY FOUNDATION$25,011
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC$20,000
THE LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA SOCIETY$20,000
SCOTTISH RITE FOR CHILDREN$20,000
NEURO ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION$18,011
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 (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 26% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CAMP SUMMIT INC: $80k → 5%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $249k → 11%CHILDRENS MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $100k → 14%CAMP SUMMIT INC: $80k → 5%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $125k → 11%CHILDRENS MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $63k → 14%MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $69k → 14%CAMP SUMMIT INC: $80k → 5%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $125k → 11%CHILDRENS MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $66k → 14%CAMP SUMMIT INC: $75k → 5%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $100k → 11%MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $60k → 14%CAMP SUMMIT INC: $73k → 5%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $98k → 11%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $60k → 16%MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $55k → 14%CAMP SUMMIT INC: $63k → 5%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $98k → 11%MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $54k → 14%CAMP SUMMIT INC: $60k → 5%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $90k → 11%CAMP SUMMIT INC: $60k → 5%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $80k → 11%WI COOK FOUNDATION INC: $175k → 11%WI COOK FOUNDATION INC: $153k → 11%WI COOK FOUNDATION INC: $112k → 11%ALL SAINTS HEALTH FOUNDATION: $100k → 14%WI COOK FOUNDATION INC: $106k → 11%ALL SAINTS HEALTH FOUNDATION: $100k → 11%WI COOK FOUNDATION INC: $72k → 11%ALL SAINTS HEALTH FOUNDATION: $60k → 11%WI COOK FOUNDATION INC: $54k → 11%TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES FOUNDATION: $50k → 11%ALL SAINTS HEALTH FOUNDATION: $50k → 11%TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES FOUNDATION: $50k → 11%CANCER CARE SERVICES: $50k → 11%TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES FOUNDATION: $50k → 11%CANCER CARE SERVICES: $50k → 11%TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES FOUNDATION: $50k → 11%CANCER CARE SERVICES: $50k → 11%TEXAS HEALTH RESOURCES FOUNDATION: $50k → 11%CANCER CARE SERVICES: $50k → 11%CANCER CARE SERVICES: $50k → 11%ALL SAINTS HEALTH FOUNDATION: $50k → 11%CANCER CARE SERVICES: $45k → 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.
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.
$4.5M · 16 repeat orgs$142k to everyone else

16 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
5

Total granted

$4.5M
$117k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%
+72%

Still filing today

81%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthEducationYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • AH
    American Heart Association Inc
    8× · 2018–2025 · $964k · revenue +26%
  • WC
    WI Cook Foundation Inc
    6× · 2020–2025 · $673k · revenue +105%
  • AS
    All Saints Health Foundation
    5× · 2019–2025 · $360k · revenue +62%

Funded once

  • MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC
    one grant, 2019 · $55k · revenue -36%
  • TO
    THE OSTEOSARCOMA INSTITUTEgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $29k · revenue +204%
  • TS
    THE SHAKEN BABY ALLIANCEgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue +72%
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
Baylor Research Institute

To improve the care and well being of our community, nationally and internationally, through innovative clinically relevant research that is consistent with the mission, vision and values of Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH).

Health
2
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
3
Children's Health System of Texas

With more than 1 million patient visits each year, Children's Health is North Texas' leading pediatric health system and among the largest in the nation. For more than a century, our mission has been clear: make life better for children.…

Health
4
Cook Children's Medical Center

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.

Health
5
Children's Hospital & Research Center At Oakland

The mission of children's hospital & research center at oakland is to protect and advance the health and well-being of children through clinical care, teaching and research.

Health
6
Children's Medical Center Research Institute At the Utsw Medical Center

The organization shall undertake, sponsor, and administer basic and/or clinical research in children's health issues.children's medical center research institute at ut southwestern (cri) is a nonprofit research institute built on the…

Health
7
Cook Children's Health Care System

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.

Health
8
Baylor Health Care System Foundation

To foster and support the activities and purposes of Baylor Scott & White Health, to encourage broad-based public support of the health care system and its affiliated institutions, and to advance the medical objectives, including…

Health
9
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc

The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…

Health
10
Baylor University Medical Center

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
11
Children's Health Care

We champion the health needs of children and families. we are committed to improving children's health by providing the highest-quality, family centered care, advanced through research and education.

Health
12
Cook Children's Medical Center - Prosper

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Texas Scottish Rite Hospital for Crippled Children; the most unlike its peers is Texas Christian University. 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

18 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. 18 of the 22 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
13/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

American Heart Association Inc: $964,043 · HealthAmerican Heart Association IncWI Cook Foundation Inc: $672,981 · HealthWI Cook Foundation IncAll Saints Health Foundation: $360,000 · HealthAll Saints Health FoundationTexas Health Resources Foundation: $330,000 · HealthTexas Health Resources FoundationCANCER CARE SERVICES: $295,000 · HealthCANCER CARE SERVICESAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $230,000 · HealthAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INCCHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $162,621 · HealthRUTLEDGE CANCER FOUNDATION: $145,000 · Health+7 more: $269,835 · Health+7 moreCAMP SUMMIT INC: $570,750 · Youth DevelopmentCAMP SUMMIT IN…MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $374,491 · OtherMUSCULAR DYS…SCOTTISH RITE FOR CHILDREN: $89,600 · OtherSCOTTISH RIT…THE LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA SOCIETY: $60,000 · OtherTHE LEUKEMIA…+1 more: $180 · OtherTEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY: $50,000 · EducationTHE SHAKEN BABY ALLIANCE: $25,000 · Education
Health$3,429,480Youth Development$570,750Other$524,271Education$75,000

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 budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $964,043 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetWI Cook Foundation Inc: $672,981 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetCAMP SUMMIT INC: $570,750 over 8y, 3.7% of budgetAll Saints Health Foundation: $360,000 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetTexas Health Resources Foundation: $330,000 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetCANCER CARE SERVICES: $295,000 over 6y, 1.8% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $230,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $162,621 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetRUTLEDGE CANCER FOUNDATION: $145,000 over 7y, 4.2% of budgetNEURO ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION: $73,011 over 4y, 2.6% of budgetMUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC: $55,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEASTER SEALS NORTH TEXAS: $50,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetTEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY: $50,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTEXAS SCOTTISH RITE HOSPITAL FOR CRIPPLED CHILDREN: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE OSTEOSARCOMA INSTITUTE: $28,644 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetTHE SHAKEN BABY ALLIANCE: $25,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetCANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE INC: $8,169 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 American Heart Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds WI Cook Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds CAMP SUMMIT INC ↗
  • Who funds All Saints Health Foundation ↗
  • Who funds Texas Health Resources Foundation ↗
  • Who funds CANCER CARE SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds RUTLEDGE CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NEURO ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds EASTER SEALS NORTH TEXAS ↗
  • Who funds TEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds TEXAS SCOTTISH RITE HOSPITAL FOR CRIPPLED CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds THE OSTEOSARCOMA INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds CAREITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE SHAKEN BABY ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds CANCER RESEARCH INSTITUTE 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.

Communities Foundation of Texas IncTX22× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Thomas M Helen McKee & John P Ryan Fo John P Ryan Foundation Inc · Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · Paul E Andrews Jr Foundation · Joe and Jessie Crump Fund Xxxxx3000 · Helen Irwin Littauer Educational Trust · Amon G Carter Foundation · Sid W Richardson Foundation · United Way of Tarrant County · Barbara Ann Baldridge Foundation We453 · The Roach Foundation Inc · America's Charities

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 W B and Ellen Gordon Stuart Trust Xxxxx1009 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from W B and Ellen Gordon Stuart Trust Xxxxx1009. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    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 · 0–10%
    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.

    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 22 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 W B and Ellen Gordon Stuart Trust Xxxxx1009’s filings →

    More from the funding graph