Skip to content
American Community Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

American Community Trust

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.

$840k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$450k
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.

Religion$1.4MHuman Services$1.2MEducation$845kFood & Nutrition$801kHealth$575kInternational$50kCrime & Legal$50kPublic Safety & Disaster$25kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $345k
  • $250k+1 grant · $450k
$50,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$5.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HIGHLAND PARK UNITED METHODIST CHURCH$450,000
EDUCATIONAL FIRST STEPS$145,000
MANRESA HOUSE OF RETREATS$100,000
LOUISIANA PAROLE PROJECT INC$50,000
UNION GOSPEL MISSION$50,000
HUNTERS FOR THE HUNGRY$25,000
TRINITY LOAVES AND FISHES$20,000
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 (FY18–21, $120k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%INCARNATION HOUSE: $45k → 14%INCARNATION HOUSE: $30k → 14%INCARNATION HOUSE: $25k → 14%INCARNATION HOUSE: $20k → 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.
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.
04

Where the work is directed

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

About 7% of American Community Trust’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 81% of the giving stays in TX; by stated purpose, 66%.

American Community Trustlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 14% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.2M · 12 repeat orgs$757k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
15

Total granted

$4.2M
$707k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-20%
0%

Still filing today

42%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationReligionHuman ServicesPhilanthropyHealthInternationalOther
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

  • EF
    EDUCATIONAL FIRST STEPS
    6× · 2020–2025 · $820k · revenue -47%
  • DT
    Dallas Theological Seminary
    5× · 2019–2023 · $625k · revenue +52%
  • HP
    HIGHLAND PARK UNITED METHODIST CHURCH
    4× · 2020–2025 · $595k

Funded once

  • YMCA OF THE ROCKIESgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $470k · revenue +61%
  • HF
    HOPE FOR HAITI INC
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue -15%
  • TB
    TEXAS BAPTIST MEN INC
    one grant, 2021 · $50k
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
Raise Texas

RAISE Texas advances equitable policies and programs that foster financial security and economic mobility for low- and moderate-income Texans. We equip, innovate and advocate to reduce disparities, remove barriers and build opportunities…

Human Services
2
Dallas International University

As a christian university, we provide education and research opportunities preparing global leaders to partner with local communities.

Education
3
Aclu Foundation of Texas Inc

The ACLU Foundation of Texas is the unyielding guardian and promoter of freedom, justice, equality and dignity of all people, particularly for those who are still fighting to secure the full exercise of their civil rights and liberties.…

Civil Rights
4
Texas Defender Service

See Schedule OTDS fights for the end of mass incarceration and excessive punishment in Texas through direct representation, policy reform, and public education. TDS stands up for the dignity and humanity of people harmed by mass…

Civil Rights
5
Episcopal Foundation of Dallas

The foundation's mission is to strengthen and support faith communities by partnering wise investments with purposeful giving.

Religion
6
Dallas Seminary Foundation

To support the mission of Dallas Theological Seminary by offering charitable planned giving and other related services to friends of the Seminary.

Education
7
West Texas Food Bank

The WTFB exists to collect, purchase, and distribute food to feed the hungry in 19 counties in West Texas in partnership with volunteers and community organizations and to educate these partners and the public at large about the real face…

—
8
Progress Texas Institute

The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.

Civil Rights
9
Southeast Texas Food Bank Inc

Food distribution to the hungry throughout an eight county service territory in Southeast Texas.

Human Services
10
Feeding Texas

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

Community Improvement
11
North Texas Christian Foundation

National Christian Foundation North Texas (NCFNT) was created to facilitate smarter Christian giving with sophisticated charitable techniques.

Philanthropy
12
American Civil Liberties Union of Texas Inc

The ACLU of Texas works with communities, at the State Capitol, and in the courts to protect and advance civil rights and civil liberties for every Texan, no exceptions.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hope for Haiti Inc; the most unlike its peers is Casner Family Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

17 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. 17 of the 28 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/17
Grantees still filing
7/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HIGHLAND PARK UNITED METHODIST CHURCH: $595,000 · OtherHIGHLAND PARK UNITED METHODIST CHURCHMANRESA HOUSE OF RETREATS: $325,000 · OtherMANRESA HOUSE OF RETREATSNORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK: $300,000 · OtherNORTH TEXAS FOOD BANKSALVATION ARMY: $275,000 · OtherSALVATION ARMYHUNTERS FOR THE HUNGRY: $190,000 · OtherHUNTERS FOR THE HUNGRYTRINITY LOAVES AND FISHES: $153,389 · OtherTRINITY LOAVES AND FISHESUNION GOSPEL MISSION: $85,000 · Other+12 more: $162,124 · Other+12 moreEDUCATIONAL FIRST STEPS: $820,000 · EducationEDUCATIONAL FIRST STEPSDallas Theological Seminary: $625,000 · EducationDallas Theological Seminary+1 more: $25,000 · EducationYMCA OF THE ROCKIES: $470,100 · Human ServicesYMCA OF THE R…EVERY AVENUE: $120,000 · Human ServicesEVERY AVENUEINVOLVED FOR LIFE INC: $550,000 · HealthINVOLVED FOR…FEEDING KIDS RIGHT INC: $157,223 · Food & NutritionLOUISIANA PAROLE PROJECT INC: $50,000 · Crime & LegalHOPE FOR HAITI INC: $50,000 · International
Other$2,085,513Education$1,470,000Human Services$590,100Health$550,000Food & Nutrition$157,223Crime & Legal$50,000International$50,000

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 budgetEDUCATIONAL FIRST STEPS: $820,000 over 6y, 6.6% of budgetDallas Theological Seminary: $625,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetINVOLVED FOR LIFE INC: $550,000 over 2y, 33% of budgetYMCA OF THE ROCKIES: $470,100 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetNORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK: $300,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetFEEDING KIDS RIGHT INC: $157,223 over 4y, 46% of budgetEVERY AVENUE: $120,000 over 4y, 7.9% of budgetHOPE FOR HAITI INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOASIS INTERNATIONAL MISSIONS INC: $25,000 over 1y, 28% of budgetSOUTHWESTERN DIABETIC FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCenter for Public Policy Priorities: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWOMEN DONORS NETWORK: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFAITH IN TEXAS - PICO: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCASNER FAMILY FOUNDATION: $72 over 1y, 5.5% 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 EDUCATIONAL FIRST STEPS ↗
  • Who funds Dallas Theological Seminary ↗
  • Who funds INVOLVED FOR LIFE INC ↗
  • Who funds YMCA OF THE ROCKIES ↗
  • Who funds NORTH TEXAS FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds FEEDING KIDS RIGHT INC ↗
  • Who funds EVERY AVENUE ↗
  • Who funds LOUISIANA PAROLE PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds HOPE FOR HAITI INC ↗
  • Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds OASIS INTERNATIONAL MISSIONS INC ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHWESTERN DIABETIC FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Center for Public Policy Priorities ↗
  • Who funds WOMEN DONORS NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds FAITH IN TEXAS - PICO ↗
  • Who funds OFICINA LEGAL DEL PUEBLO UNIDO INC ↗
  • Who funds CASNER FAMILY FOUNDATION ↗

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.

Texas Instruments Fou…Communities Foundatio…The Dallas FoundationCommunity Foundation …Raymond James Charita…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…American Endowment Fo…American Online Givin…Natl Christian Charit…National Philanthropi…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…
Texas Instruments FoundationTX19.7× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Texas Instruments Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · The Dallas Foundation · Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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 American Community Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from American Community Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Hope for Haiti Inc: 0% of 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 · 0–40%
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 28 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 American’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