Skip to content
Wolf Benevolent Tua at a glance

· Private foundation

Wolf Benevolent Tua

Its FY2026 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$63k
Granted FY2026still arriving
6
Grants FY2026still arriving
1
States reached
$18k
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$134kYouth Development$84kHealth$74kCivil Rights$44kFood & Nutrition$41kEducation$34kCrime & Legal$32kArts & Culture$4kOther$0
02FY2026 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2026

  • Under $10k2 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $53k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Children's Advocacy Center of Smith Coun$17,500
LITERACY COUNCIL OF TYLER$15,415
FOR THE SILENT$10,000
THE ARC OF GREATER EAST TEXAS$10,000
OUR HARBOR OF HOPE FOR FAMILIES$7,500
HAND UP NETWORK$3,000
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 (FY17–26, $120k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%HAND UP NETWORK: $3k → 12%PATH: $1k → 12%EAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER: $15k → 12%EAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER: $15k → 12%EAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER: $15k → 12%EAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER: $15k → 12%EAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER: $14k → 12%OUR HARBOR OF HOPE FOR FAMILIES: $8k → 12%EAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER INC: $20k → 12%EAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER INC: $15k → 12%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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$474k · 13 repeat orgs$36k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +89% since the first grant, against +61% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2026, 10 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
5

Total granted

$474k
$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+89%
+61%

Still filing today

62%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’23’24’25’26
Human ServicesEducationCrime & LegalYouth DevelopmentCivil RightsArts & 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

  • ET
    EAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER INC
    7× · 2017–2025 · $108k · revenue +73%
  • MA
    MENTORING ALLIANCE
    5× · 2017–2025 · $46k · revenue +287%
  • CF
    CASA FOR KIDS OF EAST TEXAS INC
    4× · 2018–2025 · $44k · revenue +63%

Funded once

  • TI
    TAPKARD INC
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue 0%
  • BS
    BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA
    one grant, 2021 · $3k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
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
Lone Star Casa Inc

Lone Star CASA elevates the voices of children in Kaufman and Rockwall County who have experienced abuse and neglect by providing trained volunteer advocates to work alongside children and families so they can achieve safety and stability…

Civil Rights
2
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Milam County
—
3
Court Appointed Special Advocates of North Texas Inc

To provide abused children with trained, court appointed volunteers who investigate, monitor and serve as advocates to help them secure a permanent and safe residence.

—
4
Court Appointed Special Advocates Casa of Liberty/Chambers Counties

None

Human Services
5
Casa for Kids of South Central Texas Inc

To recruit, train and supervise volunteers that advocate in the best interests of abused and neglected children in court.

Housing & Shelter
6
Northeast Texas Child Advocacy Center Inc

To bring hope and healing while working together to break the cycle of child abuse.

Human Services
7
Casa of West Texas

The mission of casa of west texas is to recruit, train and support committed volunteers who are appointed by the court to advocate for the best interest of children in the foster care system.

Civil Rights
8
Casa of Williamson County Texas

CASA of Williamson County, TX exists to empower community volunteers to advocate for children who have experienced abuse or neglect to find loving, safe, and permanent homes.

Crime & Legal
9
Court Appointed Special Advocates in the Heart of Texas

Training and supporting quality volunteers who speak out for the best interest of abused and neglected children in court in an effort to find each child a safe, permanent, nurturing home.

Civil Rights
10
Tulsa Casa Inc

Tulsa casa is organized to speak for the best interests of abused and neglected children in court. we promote and support volunteer representation for the children in an effort to provide each child a safe, permanent, nurturing home.

Civil Rights
11
Ft Bend County Child Advocates Inc

Fort Bend County Child Advocates, Inc. provides a voice, heals the hurt and breaks the cycle of abuse and neglect for children in Fort Bend County.

Civil Rights
12
Childrens Advocacy Center of Van Zandt County Inc

The children's advocacy center of van zandt county is committed to ensuring quality services and support to those children impacted by abuse while also building a future where no child in van zandt county experiences abuse.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mentoring Alliance; the most unlike its peers is Tapkard Inc. 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

12 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 21 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
10/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER: $65,500 · OtherCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTEREAST TEXAS FOOD BANK: $41,053 · OtherEAST TEXAS FOOD BANKSALVATION ARMY: $35,115 · OtherSALVATION ARMYChildren's Advocacy Center of Smith Coun: $33,500 · OtherChildren's Advocacy Center of Smith CounCHAMPION FOR CHILDREN: $15,000 · OtherCHAMPION FOR CHILDRENTHE ARC OF GREATER EAST TEXAS: $10,000 · OtherTHE ARC OF SMITH COUNTY: $8,000 · Other+3 more: $4,700 · OtherEAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER INC: $108,006 · Human ServicesEAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER I…OUR HARBOR OF HOPE FOR FAMILIES: $7,500 · Human ServicesOUR HARBOR OF HOPE FOR FAM…+2 more: $4,000 · Human ServicesLITERACY COUNCIL OF TYLER DBA PAVE EAST TEXAS: $42,915 · EducationLITERACY C…SMITH COUNTY CHAMPIONS FOR CHILDREN INC: $6,250 · EducationSMITH COUN…MENTORING ALLIANCE: $45,500 · Youth DevelopmentMENTORING …CASA FOR KIDS OF EAST TEXAS INC: $43,690 · Civil RightsCASA FOR …For the Silent: $25,866 · Crime & LegalTAPKARD INC: $10,000 · Crime & LegalDISCOVERY PLACE INC DBA THE DISCOVERY SCIENCE PLACE INC: $3,520 · Arts & Culture
Other$212,868Human Services$119,506Education$49,165Youth Development$45,500Civil Rights$43,690Crime & Legal$35,866Arts & Culture$3,520

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER INC: $108,006 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetMENTORING ALLIANCE: $45,500 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetCASA FOR KIDS OF EAST TEXAS INC: $43,690 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetLITERACY COUNCIL OF TYLER DBA PAVE EAST TEXAS: $42,915 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetFor the Silent: $25,866 over 2y, 5.9% of budgetTAPKARD INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetTHE ARC OF SMITH COUNTY: $8,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetSMITH COUNTY CHAMPIONS FOR CHILDREN INC: $6,250 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetDISCOVERY PLACE INC DBA THE DISCOVERY SCIENCE PLACE INC: $3,520 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetPATH - PEOPLE ATTEMPTING TO HELP: $1,000 over 1y, 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.

  • Who funds EAST TEXAS CRISIS CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds MENTORING ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds CASA FOR KIDS OF EAST TEXAS INC ↗
  • Who funds LITERACY COUNCIL OF TYLER DBA PAVE EAST TEXAS ↗
  • Who funds For the Silent ↗
  • Who funds TAPKARD INC ↗
  • Who funds THE ARC OF SMITH COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds OUR HARBOR OF HOPE FOR FAMILIES ↗
  • Who funds SMITH COUNTY CHAMPIONS FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
  • Who funds DISCOVERY PLACE INC DBA THE DISCOVERY SCIENCE PLACE INC ↗
  • Who funds HANDUP NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds PATH - PEOPLE ATTEMPTING TO HELP ↗

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.

Ben and Maytee Fisch …Riter Family Foundati…The Rogers FoundationHibbs Family Foundati…The Louis and Peaches…A S Genecov FoundationJames I Perkins Famil…East Texas Communitie…Byers Family Foundati…Bob L Herd FoundationWomens Fund of Smith …T B Butler Foundation
Ben and Maytee Fisch FoundationTX24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ben and Maytee Fisch Foundation · Riter Family Foundation · The Rogers Foundation · Hibbs Family Foundation · The Louis and Peaches Owen Family Foundation · A S Genecov Foundation · James I Perkins Family Foundation · East Texas Communities Foundation · Byers Family Foundation · Bob L Herd Foundation · Womens Fund of Smith County · T B Butler 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 Wolf Benevolent Tua funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wolf Benevolent Tua. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 21 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Wolf Benevolent Tua’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