Skip to content

· Public charity

Austin Board of Realtors Foundation

To connect the philanthropic passion of cental texas realtors to worthy causes related to housing, education and disaster relief.

$182k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$100k
Largest
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 2024.

Housing & Shelter$829kHuman Services$20kFood & Nutrition$20kPublic Safety & Disaster$18k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $119,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $181,675 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $62,175 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
$100,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MOBILE LOAVES & FISHES$100,000
CENTRAL TEXAS FOOD BANK$19,500
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 (FY17–23, $38k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, 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%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $13k → 10%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $5k → 14%FAMILY ELDERCARE: $8k → 10%FAMILY ELDERCARE: $8k → 10%FAMILY ELDERCARE: $5k → 10%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$852k · 5 repeat orgs$35k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
2

Total granted

$852k
$16k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+160%
+176%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterReligionFood & NutritionOther
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

  • ML
    MOBILE LOAVES & FISHES INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $500k · revenue +160%
  • AH
    AUSTIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC
    4× · 2017–2021 · $294k · revenue +271%
  • FE
    FAMILY ELDERCARE INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $20k · revenue +199%

Funded once

  • RT
    REBUILDING TOGETHER INC
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue -13%
  • FC
    FOUNDATION COMMUNITIES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $6k · revenue +176%
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
HomeAid Austin Inc

Engage in building procted to provide emergency shelters, transitional housing, and permanent housing while offering job skills training and support to help residents move toward self-sufficiency.

Employment
2
Austin Affordable Housing Corporation

To ensure and preserve quality, affordable housing opportunities for low- to moderate-income families in austin as well as provide financial literacy and homeownership opportunities.

Housing & Shelter
3
Rebuilding Together Houston

Rebuilding Together Houston is the only organization in Houston and Harris County providing free home repairs to hundreds of families each year. We employ licensed contractors to restore homes to safe, livable conditions, extending each…

Housing & Shelter
4
Dallas Area Habitat for Humanity Inc

Dallas area habitat for humanity, inc. is a nondenominational christian not-for-profit organization whose purpose is to sponsor specific projects in habitat development for the dallas, texas area. modest but adequate housing, new or…

—
5
Rebuilding Together - San Diego

To renovate and preserve affordable homeownership for low income homeowners and revitalize neighborhoods throughout san diego.

Housing & Shelter
6
Texas Low-Income Housing Information Service

Our mission is to support low-income Texans efforts to achieve the American dream of a decent, affordable home in a quality neighborhood. We believe that Texas critical low-income housing and community development needs can best be solved…

Housing & Shelter
7
Feeding Texas

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

Community Improvement
8
Rebuilding Together of Greater Charlotte

The mission of Rebuilding Together of Greater Charlotte is repairing homes, revitalizing communities, rebuilding lives.We mobilize community volunteers and contractors to provide repairs that make homes safer and healthier for…

Housing & Shelter
9
Rebuilding Together Metro Denver Inc

Repairing homes, revitalizing communities, rebuilding lives.

Community Improvement
10
American Family Housing

American family housing provides a continuum of housing and an array of services to support homeless and low-income families and adults to secure a stable home, to be an active part of their community, and to achieve a self-sustaining way…

Housing & Shelter
11
Houston Habitat for Humanity Inc

Seeking to put God's love into action, Houston Habitat for Humanity brings people together to build homes, communities and hope to provide a world where everyone has a decent place to live.

Housing & Shelter
12
Affordable Homes of South Texas Inc

Affordable Homes of South Texas, Inc. is organized for the purpose of providing housing for qualified low-income families within the City of McAllen, Texas and Hidalgo County, Texas.

Housing & Shelter
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Foundation Communities Inc; the most unlike its peers is American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches. 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

8 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MOBILE LOAVES & FISHES INC: $500,000 · ReligionMOBILE LOAVES & FISHES INCAUSTIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $293,525 · OtherAUSTIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INCREBUILDING TOGETHER AUSTIN SAN ANTONIO: $20,000 · Human ServicesFAMILY ELDERCARE INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $18,177 · Human ServicesCentral Texas Food Bank Inc: $19,500 · Food & NutritionREBUILDING TOGETHER INC: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterFOUNDATION COMMUNITIES INC: $5,615 · Housing & Shelter
Religion$500,000Other$293,525Human Services$58,177Food & Nutrition$19,500Housing & Shelter$15,615

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMOBILE LOAVES & FISHES INC: $500,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetAUSTIN HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $293,525 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetREBUILDING TOGETHER AUSTIN SAN ANTONIO: $20,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetFAMILY ELDERCARE INC: $20,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCentral Texas Food Bank Inc: $19,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $18,177 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetREBUILDING TOGETHER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOUNDATION COMMUNITIES INC: $5,615 over 1y, 0.0% 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 Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC10× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Austin Board of Realtors Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Austin Board of Realtors Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%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 · 0–60%
    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 8 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Austin Board of Realtors’ filings →

    More from the funding graph