Skip to content
Better ATX at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Better ATX

To transform the lives of children and adults through philanthropic programs.

$1.2M
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$98k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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.

Education$1.3MFood & Nutrition$35k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $197,600, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,247,388 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,049,788 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 · FY2025

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $100k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $98k
$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Austin Community College Fdn$97,600
Austin Public Education Fund$30,000
RRISD Education Foundation$20,000
Pflugerville ISD$20,000
Leander Edu Excellence Fnd$15,000
Lake Travis ISD$15,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%RRISD Education Foundation: $20k → 6%Manor ISD: $13k → 10%Austin Public Education Fund: $30k → 10%Lake Travis ISD: $15k → 10%Austin Community College Fdn: $253k → 10%Austin Community College Fdn: $179k → 10%Austin Community College Fdn: $148k → 10%Austin Community College Fdn: $144k → 10%Austin Community College Fdn: $138k → 10%Austin Community College Fdn: $106k → 10%Austin Community College Fdn: $104k → 10%Austin Community College Fdn: $98k → 10%Austin Community College Fdn: $72k → 10%Austin Community College: $12k → 10%Pflugerville ISD: $20k → 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 field
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 8 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
2/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Austin Community College Foundation: $1,241,728 · EducationAustin Community College Foundation+2 more: $45,000 · EducationPFLUGERVILLE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT: $20,000 · OtherROUND ROCK ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $20,000 · OtherLake Travis ISD: $15,000 · OtherMANOR INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT: $13,282 · OtherAustin Community College: $12,181 · Other
Education$1,286,728Other$80,463

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAustin Community College Foundation: $1,241,728 over 9y, 10.0% of budgetROUND ROCK ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetLEANDER EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 2.7% 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 Austin Community College Foundation ↗
  • Who funds AUSTIN PUBLIC EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ROUND ROCK ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds LEANDER EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE 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.

Austin Community Foun…Ascension SetonUnited Way for Greate…St David's FoundationCommunities Foundatio…The Moody FoundationThe Blackbaud Giving …The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Austin Community Foundation IncTX27.1× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Austin Community Foundation Inc · Ascension Seton · United Way for Greater Austin · St David's Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · The Moody Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Better ATX funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Better ATX. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Better ATX’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