Skip to content
Azura Credit Union at a glance

· Public charity

Azura Credit Union

Azura is enhancing lives by delivering innovative financial service, education, and value through personal and community engagement.

$262k
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$32k
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, FY2020 to 2024.

Health$258kHousing & Shelter$76kFood & Nutrition$68kYouth Development$64kRecreation & Sports$60kPublic Benefit$54kCommunity Improvement$52kEducation$51kOther$0
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $208,188, the rows itemized in this filing. The $261,707 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $53,519 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

  • Under $10k1 grant · $10k
  • $10k–50k10 grants · $198k
$18,167
Median grant
1
States reached
$830M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MILITARY VETERAN PROJECT INC$31,967
TARC INC$29,373
WASHBURN UNIVERSITY$27,324
BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF TOPEKA$19,363
TOPEKA RESCUE MISSION$18,385
TOPEKA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$18,167
HARVESTERS-THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK$17,275
SUPPORTING KIDS FOUNDATION$14,141
STORMONT-VAIL HEALTHCARE INC$11,819
HELPING HANDS HUMANE SOCIETY$10,625
SHAWNEE HEIGHTS PUBLIC SCHOOLS$9,749
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 (FY20–24, $117k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%TARC INC: $29k → 14%TARC INC: $25k → 14%TARC INC: $23k → 14%TARC INC: $22k → 14%TARC INC: $19k → 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$640k · 10 repeat orgs$59k to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
3

Total granted

$640k
$21k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-4%
+19%

Still filing today

90%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $38k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHealthPublic BenefitHousing & ShelterFood & NutritionYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • TI
    TARC INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $117k · revenue +21%
  • HT
    HARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK
    6× · 2020–2025 · $68k · revenue +10%
  • PF
    PARKS FOR ALL FOUNDATION
    2× · 2020–2021 · $60k · revenue +120%

Funded once

  • ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +59%
  • HC
    HEARTLAND CREDIT UNION CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2021 · $6k · revenue +19%
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF KAW VALLEY INC
    one grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue -7%
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
The Topeka Public Schools Foundation

To enhance educational opportunities for all students through a partnership of our community and its public schools.

—
2
Greater Topeka Chamber of Commerce

The greater topeka chamber of commerce mobilizes the community to speak with a highly influential voice in support of public policies that create economic success. through a robust advocacy program which includes extensive professional…

—
3
South Central Community Foundation

The Foundation's mission is to enhance the life, culture and community of South Central Kansas by connecting people who care with causes that matter.

Philanthropy
4
The Ku Endowment Charitable Gift Fund

To strengthen the University and communities that have touched the lives of KU alumni and friends, the mission of The KU Endowment Charitable Gift Fund is to receive and administer gifts and bequests to further the charitable objectives of…

Philanthropy
5
Tulsa Area United Way

The tulsa area united way unites people and resources to improve lives and strengthen our communities.

—
6
Greater Topeka Partnership Inc

To be the catalyst for economic prosperity within our community.

Community Improvement
7
Growth Organization of Topekashawnee Co

Go topeka creates county-wide economic success for all companies and citizens through implementation of an aggressive economic development strategy that capitalizes on the unique strengths of the community.

Community Improvement
8
Sunflower Foundation Health Care for Kansans

To assist the state of kansas in helping to improve the health of all kansans, particularly those unserved or underserved.

Health
9
Tarc Foundation

The purpose of the foundation is to ensure a strong financial base through active community involvement in order to support tarc, inc's mission of enhancing the lives of people affected by developmental and related disabilities through…

Health
10
Kansas Food Bank Foundation Inc

To serve as a fundraising and support organization for the kansas foodbank warehouse, inc.

Food & Nutrition
11
Kansas Foodbank Warehouse Inc

To feed the hungry by soliciting and receiving food and other goods from local, regional and national food companies and other enterprises

Food & Nutrition
12
Washburn University Charitable Gift Fund

To strengthen the university and communities that have touched the lives of wu alumni and friends, the mission of the washburn university charitable gift fund is to receive and administer gifts and bequests to further the charitable…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Topeka Community Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Military Veteran Project 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

15 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. 15 of the 16 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/15
Grantees still filing
7/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TARC INC: $117,443 · Human ServicesTARC INCSUPPORTING KIDS FOUNDATION: $47,961 · Human ServicesSUPPORTING KIDS FOUNDATIO…MILITARY VETERAN PROJECT INC: $109,926 · Public BenefitMILITARY VETERAN …TOPEKA RESCUE MISSION INC: $76,204 · Housing & ShelterTOPEKA RESC…HARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK: $68,089 · Food & NutritionHARVESTERS…BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF TOPEKA: $64,208 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS AND G…PARKS FOR ALL FOUNDATION: $60,000 · Recreation & SportsPARKS FOR…KTWU: $27,324 · OtherKTWUSHAWNEE HEIGHTS PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $24,018 · OtherSHAWNEE HEIGHTS PUBLIC SCHOO…GREATER TOPEKA PARTNERSHIP FOUNDATION: $46,000 · OtherGREATER TOPEKA PARTNERSHIP F…Stormont-Vail Healthcare Inc: $26,397 · OtherStormont-Vail Healthcare IncST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $10,000 · OtherST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH …TOPEKA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $25,667 · OtherTOPEKA COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONHELPING HANDS HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $10,625 · OtherHELPING HANDS HUMANE SOCIETY…+2 more: $10,603 · Other+2 more
Human Services$165,404Public Benefit$109,926Housing & Shelter$76,204Food & Nutrition$68,089Youth Development$64,208Recreation & Sports$60,000Other$180,634

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTARC INC: $117,443 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetMILITARY VETERAN PROJECT INC: $109,926 over 6y, 82% of budgetTOPEKA RESCUE MISSION INC: $76,204 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetHARVESTERS - THE COMMUNITY FOOD NETWORK: $68,089 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF TOPEKA: $64,208 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetPARKS FOR ALL FOUNDATION: $60,000 over 2y, 6.7% of budgetSUPPORTING KIDS FOUNDATION: $47,961 over 6y, 2.3% of budgetGREATER TOPEKA PARTNERSHIP FOUNDATION: $46,000 over 5y, 12% of budgetStormont-Vail Healthcare Inc: $26,397 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTOPEKA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $25,667 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetHELPING HANDS HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $10,625 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHEARTLAND CREDIT UNION CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC: $5,603 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetUNITED WAY OF KAW VALLEY INC: $5,000 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.

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.

One Gas Foundation IncBnsf Railway Foundati…Global ImpactBlanche Bryden Founda…Stormont-Vail Foundat…Topeka Community Foun…American Endowment Fo…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…
One Gas Foundation IncOK19.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: One Gas Foundation Inc · Bnsf Railway Foundation · Global Impact · Blanche Bryden Foundation · Stormont-Vail Foundation · Topeka Community Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Azura Credit Union funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Azura Credit Union. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 16 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.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $332k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Azura Credit Union’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