Skip to content
Weaver and Tidwell Private Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Weaver and Tidwell Private 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.

$99k
Granted FY2025still arriving
50
Grants FY2025still arriving
12
States reached
$4k
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.

Human Services$177kInternational$158kHealth$125kHousing & Shelter$124kFood & Nutrition$106kYouth Development$91kEducation$26kCommunity Improvement$18kOther$0
02FY2025 · 50 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,000
Median grant
12
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE ALS ASSOCIATION$4,000
THE LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA SOCIETY$4,000
RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES INC$3,919
PATHFINDERS$2,917
MEALS ON WHEELS$2,917
THE WARM PLACE$2,916
THE WOMEN'S CENTER$2,500
AGAPE RESOURCE AND ASSISTANCE CENTER$2,081
HUGH O'BRIAN YOUTH LEADERSHIP$2,000
NATIONAL MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS SOCIETY$2,000
SPECIAL OLYMPICS TEXAS$2,000
AGAPE DEVELOPMENT$2,000
MEALS ON WHEELS ODESSA$2,000
VISION GUIDE DOGS$2,000
PANHANDLE COMMUNITY SERVICES$2,000
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, $114k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 90% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%GROWGOOD: $3k → 14%PATRIOT PAWS SERVICE DOGS: $2k → 5%HOPE'S DOOR NEW BEGINNING CENTER: $4k → 5%GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION: $5k → 11%RANSOMED LIFE: $1k → 16%PANHANDLE COMMUNITY SERVICES: $2k → 20%NOURISHING BETHESDA: $2k → 8%FAMILY VIOLENCE PREVENTION SERVICES INC: $1k → 16%PANHANDLE COMMUNITY SERVICES: $2k → 20%GROWGOOD: $2k → 14%THE SPRINGBOARD CENTER: $2k → 14%INFANT CRISIS SERVICES: $5k → 16%CENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVES: $5k → 11%SHARING HANDS A RESPITE EXPERIENCE: $2k → 14%BASIN DREAM CENTER FOR ORPHANS: $1k → 12%BEHIND EVERY DOOR MINISTRIES INC: $5k → 14%UNION STATION HOMELESS SERVICES: $5k → 14%SUCCESSFUL CONNECTIONS INC DBA DRESS FOR SUCCESS: $1k → 16%THE WOMENS HOME: $4k → 16%THE CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY: $5k → 17%SAFEHAVEN OF TARRANT COUNTY: $2k → 11%SUMMERHOUSE HOUSTON: $2k → 16%COMMUNITY PARTNERS OF DALLAS: $1k → 14%AUSTIN DIAPER BANK: $1k → 10%HOUSTON WELCOMES REFUGEES: $1k → 16%US VETS: $2k → 14%CITY SQUARE: $5k → 14%CITY SQUARE: $2k → 14%EMBRACE GRACE: $1k → 11%CITY SQUARE: $1k → 14%IT'S A SENSORY WORLD: $2k → 14%IT'S A SENSORY WORLD: $2k → 14%VOW22: $2k → 14%IT'S A SENSORY WORLD: $2k → 14%ITS A SENSORY WORLD: $2k → 14%THE PARENTING CENTER: $3k → 11%THE PARENTING CENTER: $2k → 11%KIDS' MEALS: $2k → 16%THE PARENTING CENTER: $1k → 11%MHMR VISIONS: $1k → 11%HOUSTON WELCOMES REFUGEES: $2k → 16%THE PARENTING CENTER: $1k → 11%CONNECTING POINT OF PARK CITIES: $3k → 14%CONNECTING POINT OF PARK CITIES: $1k → 14%NORTH DALLAS SHARED MINISTRIES: $3k → 14%GENESIS WOMENS SHELTER & SUPPORT: $5k → 14%CONNECTING POINT OF PARK CITIES: $2k → 14%CONNECTING POINT OF PARK CITIES: $2k → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

ME
WA
MT
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
IA
OH
PA
NJ
CT
CA
CO
MO
KY
VA
MD
AZ
KS
AR
TN
SC
DC
OK
GA
TX
FL
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.

27%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$242k · 33 repeat orgs$659k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +18% since the first grant, against +1% for those funded once.

33 repeat relationships: 16 still active in FY2025, 17 since wound down; 34 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

33
208

Total granted

$242k
$595k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
+1%

Still filing today

94%
69%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 35% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $64k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthYouth DevelopmentEducationInternationalCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • SA
    SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK
    2× · 2020–2022 · $11k · revenue +18%
  • TA
    Tarrant Area Food Bank
    3× · 2020–2025 · $11k · revenue +26%
  • AH
    American Heart Association Inc
    4× · 2018–2025 · $11k · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • TG
    THE GLOBAL ORPHAN PROJECT INC
    one grant, 2024 · $75k · revenue 0%
  • TG
    THE GLOBAL ORPHAN PROJECT INC (CARE PORTAL)
    one grant, 2023 · $63k
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY
    one grant, 2017 · $60k
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
Big Brothers Big Sisters of Central Texas Inc

To help children reach their potential through professionally supported one-to-one relationships with measurable impact.

—
2
Children's Connections Inc

Children's connections' mission is to empower families, promote healthy early childhood development, and foster family engagement to ensure a strong foundation for lifelong well-being.

Human Services
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
Family and Child Guidance Center

Our mission is to provide quality mental health services to children and adults in low income families who are impacted by severe and persistent mental illness, emotional disturbances, child abuse and neglect, high-risk behaviors and…

Health
5
Any Baby Can of Austin Inc

Any baby can, an austin-based nonprofit, partners with parents so children reach their full potential. with programs that meet clients where they are at home, work or school any baby can provides in-home therapy, parent education, mental…

—
6
Family Service Center of Houston and Harris County

The mission of Family Service Center of Houston and Harris County (Family Houston) is to create a stronger community for tomorrow by helping individuals and families meet the challenges they face today. We help others help themselves.

Human Services
7
Feeding Texas

To lead a unified effort for a hunger-free texas.

Community Improvement
8
National Domestic Violence Hotline

The national domestic violence hotline provides crisis intervention, saftey planning, resources, information, and referrals to those affected by relationship abuse.

Human Services
9
Pressley Ridge Texas

Texas family care network, a division of pressley ridge texas, is the single source continuum contractor (sscc) for region 5 (deep east) of texas. as the sscc, texas family care network finds forever families for children in state care by…

Human Services
10
Child Abuse Network Inc dba Child Advocacy Network

In Tulsa County there are several agencies that address prevention and treatment of child abuse, but the Child Advocacy Network (CAN) is the ONLY nonprofit that provides intervention services for children and their nonoffending…

Crime & Legal
11
Texprotects-the Texas Association for the Protection of Children

TexProtects advances public policy and local implementation to strenghten families to prevent child abuse and neglect.

Youth Development
12
Homeless Network of Texas

To lead texas communities to make homelessness rare, brief, and non- curring; to help communities strategically plan to prevent and end homelessness.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Childserve Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Apogee Strong Foundation. 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

203 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. 203 of the 278 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)
33
Early backer (in before they grew)
195/203
Grantees still filing
106/203
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE GLOBAL ORPHAN PROJECT INC (CARE PORTAL): $62,500 · OtherTHE GLOBAL ORPHAN PROJECT INC (CARE PORTAL)HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $60,000 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY+111 more: $285,250 · Other+111 moreRonald McDonald House Global: $53,919 · HealthRonald McDonald H…American Heart Association Inc: $10,529 · HealthAmerican Heart As…BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $5,500 · HealthRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF CENTRAL TEXAS INC: $5,500 · HealthTHE WOMEN'S CENTER OF TARRANT COUNTY INC: $5,000 · HealthCYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION: $5,000 · HealthALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $5,000 · HealthRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE OF NEW YORK INC: $5,000 · HealthNATIONAL BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $4,500 · Health+16 more: $32,055 · Health+16 moreCITYSQUARE: $7,500 · Human ServicesCITYSQUAREIts a Sensory World Inc: $7,000 · Human ServicesIts a Sensory …CONNECTING POINT OF PARK CITIES: $6,500 · Human ServicesCONNECTING POI…THE PARENTING CENTER: $6,000 · Human ServicesTHE PARENTING …INFANT CRISIS SERVICES INC: $5,500 · Human ServicesCENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVES: $5,000 · Human ServicesTHE GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION: $5,000 · Human ServicesTHE CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY: $5,000 · Human ServicesBEHIND EVERY DOOR MINISTRIES INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesGENESIS WOMENS SHELTER & SUPPORT: $5,000 · Human ServicesGROWGOOD INC: $4,750 · Human ServicesUNION STATION HOMELESS SERVICES: $4,500 · Human ServicesHouston Area Women's Center: $4,000 · Human ServicesTHE WOMEN'S HOME: $4,000 · Human ServicesHOPE'S DOOR NEW BEGINNING CENTER: $4,000 · Human Services+18 more: $32,450 · Human Services+18 moreTHE GLOBAL ORPHAN PROJECT INC: $75,000 · PhilanthropyTHE GLOBAL …COMMUNITIES FOUNDATION OF TEXAS INC: $3,500 · Philanthropy+2 more: $4,650 · Philanthropy+2 moreBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF OKLAHOMA COUNTY INC: $6,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER DALLAS INC: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER TARRANT COUNTY INC: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentBoys and Girls Clubs of the Permian Basin Inc: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentMadison Square Boys and Girls Club Foundation Inc: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentBoys and Girls Clubs of Greater Houston Inc: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF AUSTIN AND TRAVIS COUNTY INC: $4,500 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SAN ANTONIO: $4,500 · Youth DevelopmentTRAILBLAZER CAMPS INC: $4,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER SAN DIEGO: $4,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF PORTLAND METROPOLITAN AREA: $3,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA 571 CIRCLE TEN COUNCIL: $2,000 · Youth DevelopmentBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS LONE STAR: $2,000 · Youth DevelopmentJack and Jill of America Foundation Inc: $2,000 · Youth Development+1 more: $1,500 · Youth DevelopmentAgape Homes CDC: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterAGAPE RESOURCE & ASSISTANCE CENTER INC: $8,081 · Housing & ShelterARLINGTON LIFE SHELTER: $7,750 · Housing & ShelterSTAR OF HOPE MISSION: $3,500 · Housing & ShelterCHRISTIAN COMMUNITY ACTION: $2,000 · Housing & Shelter+1 more: $1,000 · Housing & ShelterCentral Texas Food Bank Inc: $11,000 · Food & NutritionJACOBS & CUSHMAN SAN DIEGO FOOD BANK: $5,000 · Food & NutritionCITY HARVEST INC: $5,000 · Food & NutritionEQUAL HEART: $1,500 · Food & Nutrition
Other$407,750Health$132,003Human Services$111,200Philanthropy$83,150Youth Development$58,500Housing & Shelter$32,331Food & Nutrition$22,500

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE GLOBAL ORPHAN PROJECT INC: $75,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetRonald McDonald House Global: $53,919 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK: $11,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCentral Texas Food Bank Inc: $11,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTarrant Area Food Bank: $11,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $10,529 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetThe Houston Food Bank: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAgape Homes CDC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSHARE OUR STRENGTH: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWEST TEXAS FOOD BANK: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAGAPE RESOURCE & ASSISTANCE CENTER INC: $8,081 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetARLINGTON LIFE SHELTER: $7,750 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCITYSQUARE: $7,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIts a Sensory World Inc: $7,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetLOS ANGELES REGIONAL FOOD BANK: $6,900 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCONNECTING POINT OF PARK CITIES: $6,500 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF OKLAHOMA COUNTY INC: $6,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PARENTING CENTER: $6,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $5,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetINFANT CRISIS SERVICES INC: $5,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF CENTRAL TEXAS INC: $5,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR TRANSFORMING LIVES: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFEED THE CHILDREN INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSCHOOL ON WHEELS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLOS ANGELES BOYS & GIRLS CLUB: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetJACOBS & CUSHMAN SAN DIEGO FOOD BANK: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER DALLAS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE WOMEN'S CENTER OF TARRANT COUNTY INC: $5,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER TARRANT COUNTY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCITY HARVEST INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCYSTIC FIBROSIS FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBEHIND EVERY DOOR MINISTRIES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBoys and Girls Clubs of the Permian Basin Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGENESIS WOMENS SHELTER & SUPPORT: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE URBAN OUTREACH CENTER OF NEW YORK CITY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetMadison Square Boys and Girls Club Foundation Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE OF NEW YORK INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBoys and Girls Clubs of Greater Houston Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGROWGOOD INC: $4,750 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetUNION STATION HOMELESS SERVICES: $4,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $4,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF AUSTIN AND TRAVIS COUNTY INC: $4,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SAN ANTONIO: $4,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTRAILBLAZER CAMPS INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.1% 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.

The Moody FoundationKen W Davis FoundationHelen Greathouse Char…Permian Basin Area Fo…The Dallas FoundationAbell-Hanger Foundati…Communities Foundatio…Beal FoundationScharbauer Foundation…Warren Charitable Fou…Thomas M Helen McKee …Textron Charitable Tr…
The Moody FoundationTX39.3× affinity20 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Moody Foundation · Ken W Davis Foundation · Helen Greathouse Charitable Trust · Permian Basin Area Foundation · The Dallas Foundation · Abell-Hanger Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Beal Foundation · Scharbauer Foundation Inc · Warren Charitable Foundation · Thomas M Helen McKee & John P Ryan Fo John P Ryan Foundation Inc · Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353

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 Weaver and Tidwell Private Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Weaver and Tidwell Private Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • Homes With Hope: 28% of income from government
  • Oklahoma City Family Justice Center Inc: 14% of income from government
  • Center for Childrens Advocacy Inc: 5% of income from government
  • Best Buddies International Inc: 4% of income from government
  • Feed the Children Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
61report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 278 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 Weaver and Tidwell Private’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