How much did William Scott Mace Foundation grant in FY2025?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 56% of William Scott Mace Foundation’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

meals wheels

2019

meals wheelschildrens

2020

—

2021

childrens

2022

—

2023

houstonchildrens

2024

houston

2025

christ futurefuture buildinghoustoneast-west ministriesministries international

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

Under $10k6 grants · $24k
$10k–50k5 grants · $90k
$50k–250k4 grants · $243k

$15,000

Median grant

States reached

$1.5M

Total assets

Largest grants

WOODRIDGE BAPTIST CHURCH$75,000
CAMP REFUGE$68,000
LAZYBROOK BAPTIST CHURCH$50,000
WOODRIDGE BAPTIST CHURCH$50,000
EAST-WEST MINISTRIES INTERNATIONAL$25,000
EAST-WEST MINISTRIES INTERNATIONAL$20,000
COME BACK ALIVE INC$15,000
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS AS MISSION INC$15,000
PRYTULA FOUNDATION USA$15,000
COMMUNITY PREGNANCY CENTER OF PASADENA$5,000
CHRIS CJ JOHNSON FOUNDATION$5,000
MISSION NORTHEAST INC$5,000
MISSION CENTERS OF HOUSTON$5,000
HOUSTON LIVESTOCK SHOW & RODEO INC$3,000
COMPASSION INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED$1,400

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY18–25, $31k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11% — the area typically sits at 11%. 34% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 7% of William Scott Mace Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.

William Scott Mace Foundationlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 4.3% directed abroad (not shown)

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$1.1M · 25 repeat orgs$192k to everyone else

25 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$1.1M

$112k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%

+44%

Still filing today

64%

44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $80k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

InternationalHealthHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentHousing & ShelterReligionOther

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

ST JUDE CHILDRENS RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC
8× · 2017–2024 · $190k · revenue +74%
CR
CAMP REFUGE
5× · 2021–2025 · $103k · revenue +2%
O
ONEGOAL
7× · 2017–2023 · $61k · revenue +14%

Funded once

TU
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER
one grant, 2024 · $25k
AF
ABWE FOUNDATION INC
one grant, 2022 · $10k
AD
ALZHEIMERS DISEASE AND RELATED DISORDERS
one grant, 2019 · $9k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Houston Christian Foundation dba

Houston Christian Foundation (HCF), an affiliate of the National Christian Foundation (NCF), was created to facilitate Christian giving by offering the convenience and efficiency of donor-advised funds through NCF. HCF provides educational…

—

Target Hunger Inc

Ensure a Houston where no one goes hungry and all can provide food for themselves and families.

Human Services

Christianity Today International

Equipping Christians to renew their minds, serve the church, and create culture to the glory of God

Religion

Servenow

Sharing Christ's passion for the world by serving the most vulnerable through national churches and leaders.

Human Services

Youth for Christ International Ministries

To give every young person in every nation the opportunity to make a decision to follow Christ.

Religion

Presbyterian School

Family, School, and Church united in the education and support of each child.

Education

Mission Without Borders Incorporated

A network of Christians who journey with the poor and marginalized, enabling and encouraging people to lift themselves out of poverty.

International

Redeeming Justice Network

Houston Legal Aid Center protects and advances the rights of the poor through the provision of Christian-based legal advocacy either pro bono or at reduced-cost.

Civil Rights

Christian Mission for the United Nations

Christian Mission for the United Nations Community is a ministry aimed at leading the head of every nation and other top leaders to faith in Jesus Christ and helping them to walk in dependence upon God as they discharge the…

—

Hcpn Inc

To strengthen church planters and to multiply churches in the greater Houston area.

—

Harvest Bridge

Harvest Bridge equips South Asian Christians to serve their communities more effectively. With our assistance, people and communities in South Asia are transformed by the love of Christ.

Religion

Lifewater Inc

Lifewater International is a non-profit Christian water development organization.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mission Centers of Houston and the most unlike its peers is Compassion International Incorporated. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 23 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) — 17% of your grantees by number, and just 6% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/32

the rest of the field

13%

17,176/136,772

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.

06the grantee network

26 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

25/26

Grantees still filing

20/26

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$765,436Health$251,500Religion$136,000Youth Development$73,250International$58,848Human Services$30,500Housing & Shelter$12,000

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.

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.

Shell USA Company FoundationTX15.3× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Shell USA Company Foundation · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Hildebrand Foundation · Strake Foundation · Albert & Ethel Herzstein · Servant Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust

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 organisation William Scott Mace Foundation 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.

2025

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%

typical government reliance, FY20–25

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: CAMP REFUGE.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 821291455 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on CAMP REFUGE, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue held over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 14% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to William Scott Mace Foundation?

Find your warmest path to William Scott Mace Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

William Scott Mace Foundation

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

26 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to William Scott Mace Foundation?

More from the funding graph

William Scott Mace Foundation

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

26 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to William Scott Mace Foundation?

More from the funding graph