Skip to content
B C and Gladys L Drinkard Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

B C and Gladys L Drinkard Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$15k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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.

Human Services$13kAnimals$7kPublic Safety & Disaster$7kHealth$4kArts & Culture$3kEducation$3kHousing & Shelter$2kRecreation & Sports$850Other$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$418k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AMERICAN RED CROSS - TEXAS BIG COUN$5,000
CORINNE T SMITH ANIMAL CENTER$5,000
SLEEP IN HEAVENLY PEACE$3,000
CENTRAL TEXAS EDUCATION CENTER$1,500
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 (FY18–23, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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%CENTRAL TEXAS PREGNANCY CENTER: $2k → 17%CENTRAL TEXAS PREGNANCY CARE CENTER: $2k → 17%THE ARK DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHELTER: $2k → 17%THE ARK DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHELTER: $2k → 17%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.

26%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$10k · 3 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +33% since the first grant, against +26% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
13

Total granted

$10k
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
+26%

Still filing today

100%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
EducationHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesArts & CultureReligionAnimalsOther
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

  • TA
    The Ark Domestic Violence Shelter Inc
    2× · 2018–2023 · $4k · revenue +33%
  • CT
    CENTRAL TEXAS PREGNANCY CARE CENTER
    2× · 2018–2023 · $4k · revenue +60%
  • BC
    BROWN COUNTY HOME SOLUTIONS INC
    2× · 2017–2023 · $2k · revenue -142%

Funded once

  • AE
    ALDERSGATE ENRICHMENT CENTER INC
    one grant, 2022 · $2k · revenue -21%
  • LP
    LYRIC PERFORMING ARTS COMPANY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +269%
  • BC
    BROWN COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY
    one grant, 2021 · $2k · revenue -5%
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
South Texas Pregnancy Care Center

Crisis pregnancy counseling.

Health
2
Texas Foster Care & Adoption Serv

A state of texas licensed foster care and adoption agency that identifies and provides approved healing foster homes for children.

Human Services
3
The Lullaby House

The Lullaby House missionis ot strengthen families by providing programs and services to teenage parents and familites in need which will inspire and promote generational change.

Youth Development
4
Wise County Domestic Violence Task Force

To assist sexual assault and domestic violence victims. To operate a safe shelter and provide counseling services.

Crime & Legal
5
Wilbarger Humane Society

Care for abandoned animals in vernon and wilbarger county, tx including spay, neuter, adoption and education.

Animals
6
The Library At Cedar Creek Lake

Provide library services to a three county area in rural east texas.

Education
7
The Elizabeth House Maternity Home

Crisis Pregnancy Center

Human Services
8
Shelter Agencies for Families in East Texas

To provide shelter to abused families.

Human Services
9
Home On the Green Pastures

Providing the shelter and counseling for the abused women and children

Human Services
10
Brown County Christian Academy

Proividing a classical christian academy for school-age children for the youth of brown county and surrounding counties

Education
11
Houston Serenity Place Inc

To provide a clean, safe, nurturing environment for children placed by child protective services.

—
12
South Texas Christian Ministries Medina County Christian Job Corps

To provide actionable, compassionate, healing services and referrals to people who are experiencing or have experienced sexually related trauma

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Aldersgate Enrichment Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Central Texas Pregnancy Care Center. 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

10 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. 10 of the 20 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMERICAN RED CROSS - TEXAS BIG COUN: $5,000 · OtherAMERICAN RED CROSS - TEXAS BIG COUNCORINNE T SMITH ANIMAL CENTER: $5,000 · OtherCORINNE T SMITH ANIMAL CENTERSALVATION ARMY: $1,500 · OtherSALVATION ARMYCASA IN THE HEART OF TEXAS: $1,500 · OtherCASA IN THE HEART OF TEXASBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB: $1,000 · OtherBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBBROWN COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARD: $1,000 · OtherBROWN COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARDFELLOWSHIP OF CHRISTIAN ATHLETES: $850 · OtherBROWNWOOD AREA COMMUNITY GARDEN: $800 · OtherPEARL GRIFFIN LATCH KEY: $750 · Other+1 more: $500 · OtherThe Ark Domestic Violence Shelter Inc: $4,000 · Human ServicesThe Ark Domestic Viole…CENTRAL TEXAS PREGNANCY CARE CENTER: $4,000 · Human ServicesCENTRAL TEXAS PREGNANC…SLEEP IN HEAVENLY PEACE INC: $3,000 · Housing & ShelterSLEEP IN HEAVE…BROWN COUNTY HOME SOLUTIONS INC: $2,200 · Housing & ShelterBROWN COUNTY H…LYRIC PERFORMING ARTS COMPANY INC: $2,000 · EducationLYRIC PERFOR…CENTRAL TEXAS EDUCATION CENTER: $1,500 · EducationCENTRAL TEXA…HOWARD PAYNE UNIVERSITY: $1,000 · EducationHOWARD PAYNE…ALDERSGATE ENRICHMENT CENTER INC: $2,000 · ReligionBROWN COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY: $1,500 · AnimalsARTS COUNCIL OF BROWNWOOD: $700 · Arts & Culture
Other$17,900Human Services$8,000Housing & Shelter$5,200Education$4,500Religion$2,000Animals$1,500Arts & Culture$700

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 budgetThe Ark Domestic Violence Shelter Inc: $4,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCENTRAL TEXAS PREGNANCY CARE CENTER: $4,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetSLEEP IN HEAVENLY PEACE INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBROWN COUNTY HOME SOLUTIONS INC: $2,200 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetALDERSGATE ENRICHMENT CENTER INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCENTRAL TEXAS EDUCATION CENTER: $1,500 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetBROWN COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY: $1,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHOWARD PAYNE UNIVERSITY: $1,000 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.

Central Texas Foundat…E P Woodruff TrustThomas B Shoemake Tru…Tom & Lilian Grinnan …Amazonsmile Foundation
Central Texas Foundation IncTX22.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Central Texas Foundation Inc · E P Woodruff Trust · Thomas B Shoemake Trust · Tom & Lilian Grinnan Wilkinson Trust · 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 B C and Gladys L Drinkard Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from B C and Gladys L Drinkard Foundation Inc. 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%4%8%11%15%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 · 0–15%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to B C and Gladys L Drinkard Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to B C and Gladys L Drinkard Foundation Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 20 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on B C and Gladys L Drinkard’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