Skip to content
Alamo Workforce Development Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Alamo Workforce Development Inc

The workforce solutions alamo board serves as the governing board for the regional workforce system, a network of service providers and contractors that brings people and jobs together.

$157M
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$152M
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, FY2018 to 2024.

Human Services$633MEmployment$99M
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $117k
  • $250k+9 grants · $163M
$1,028,198
Median grant
2
States reached
$34M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CITY OF SAN ANTONIO$152,256,903
SERCO OF TEXAS INC$3,980,684
C2 GLOBAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LLC$1,700,214
SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK$1,631,965
CHRYSALIS MINISTRIES$1,028,198
FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF SAN ANTONIO$936,132
YWCA SAN ANTONIO$617,246
TEXAS A & M UNIVERSITY - SAN ANTONIO$577,290
GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF SAN ANONTIO$295,870
ALLIANCE FOR TECHNOLOGY$117,029
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 (FY23–25, $3.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF SAN ANTONIO: $936k → 16%YWCA SAN ANTONIO: $1.3M → 16%FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF SAN ANTONIO: $354k → 16%YWCA SAN ANTONIO: $617k → 16%FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF SAN ANTONIO: $100k → 16%YWCA SAN ANTONIO: $246k → 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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$893M · 16 repeat orgs$2.2M to everyone else

16 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
7

Total granted

$893M
$1.4M

Still filing today

31%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $873k 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
Human ServicesEducationCrime & LegalOther
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
    3× · 2023–2025 · $2.5M · revenue +25%
  • CM
    CHRYSALIS MINISTRIES INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $2.2M · revenue +59% · 45% of their budget
  • FS
    Family Service Association of San Antonio Inc
    3× · 2023–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • UH
    UNIQUE HR
    one grant, 2018 · $501k
  • MS
    MITCHELL SERVICE COMPANY LLC
    one grant, 2019 · $281k
  • UE
    UNIQUE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES
    one grant, 2018 · $268k
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
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 25 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
5/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CITY OF SAN ANTONIO: $785,657,736 · OtherCITY OF SAN ANTONIOC2 GLOBAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: $70,586,768 · OtherC2 GLOBAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES+19 more: $32,441,628 · OtherYOUNG WOMENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN ANTONIO: $2,168,395 · Human ServicesFamily Service Association of San Antonio Inc: $1,390,028 · Human ServicesCHRYSALIS MINISTRIES INC: $2,220,561 · Crime & LegalALLIANCE FOR TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION IN ADVANCED MATH AND SCIENCE (ATEAMS): $831,625 · Education
Other$888,686,132Human Services$3,558,423Crime & Legal$2,220,561Education$831,625

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 budgetSAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK: $2,456,852 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetCHRYSALIS MINISTRIES INC: $2,220,561 over 3y, 45% of budgetYOUNG WOMENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN ANTONIO: $2,168,395 over 3y, 13% of budgetFamily Service Association of San Antonio Inc: $1,390,028 over 3y, 2.9% of budgetALLIANCE FOR TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION IN ADVANCED MATH AND SCIENCE (ATEAMS): $831,625 over 8y, 97% 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 SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds CHRYSALIS MINISTRIES INC ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG WOMENS CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN ANTONIO ↗
  • Who funds Family Service Association of San Antonio Inc ↗
  • Who funds ALLIANCE FOR TECHNOLOGY EDUCATION IN ADVANCED MATH AND SCIENCE (ATEAMS) ↗
  • Who funds GOODWILL INDUSTRIES OF SAN ANTONIO ↗

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.

United Way of San Ant…San Antonio Area Foun…St Luke's Lutheran He…John L Santikos Chari…Harvey E Najim Charit…Methodist Healthcare …
United Way of San Antonio and Bexar CountyTX17.7× affinity6 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of San Antonio and Bexar County · San Antonio Area Foundation · St Luke's Lutheran Health Ministries Inc · John L Santikos Charitable Foundation · Harvey E Najim Charitable Foundation · Methodist Healthcare Ministries of South Texas Inc

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 Alamo Workforce Development Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Alamo Workforce Development Inc. 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%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 25 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 Alamo Workforce Development’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