· Private foundation
Broughton Foundation Trust
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $10k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $80k
- $50k–250k11 grants · $1.1M
- $250k+6 grants · $2.7M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Howard County Volunteer Fire Dept | $890,000 |
| Children's Medical Center | $500,000 |
| YMCA Teen Center | $500,000 |
| UMC Foundation | $300,000 |
| Martin County Hospital District | $250,000 |
| Cook Children's Health Foundation | $250,000 |
| West Texas Rehabilitation Center | $125,000 |
| Westside Community Daycare Center | $120,000 |
| West Texas Counseling Guidance Cent | $110,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $110,000 |
| CASA of West Texas | $100,000 |
| Rape Crisis Services of Big Spring | $100,000 |
| Children's Advocacy Center | $100,000 |
| West Texas Boys Ranch | $100,000 |
| Howard County Youth Horsman Club | $98,319 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $440k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +16% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
24 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- UFUMC FOUNDATION4× · 2021–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +30%
- HCHOWARD COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT2× · 2022–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +91% · 36% of their budget
- TWThe West Texas Rehabilitation Center3× · 2017–2024 · $725k · revenue +43%
Funded once
- USUT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTERone grant, 2018 · $1.0M
- DRDORA ROBERST REHAB CENTERone grant, 2017 · $522k
- CMCHILDREN'S MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATIOone grant, 2021 · $390k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To provide family services and to provide residential child care for dependent children where there is a need to assist children and families disrupted by problems.
Support of special needs military or first responders and their families.
A state of texas licensed foster care and adoption agency that identifies and provides approved healing foster homes for children.
To procure and distribute nutritional food to qualified agencies that feed the hungry of West Central Texas.
Sunny Glen Childrens Home, Inc. cares for children in need. Our care will be competent, compassionate and professional. We will help every child achieve their greatest potential-physically, emotionally, spiritually and academically.
To provide substance abuse prevention & treatment.
To provide services for the protection of abused and neglected children that are in the custody of the State of Texas.
To support and compliment the work of Workforce Solutions of West Central Texas Board, which is responsible for the planning, oversight, and evaluation of a consolidated workforce system for the 19 County West Central Texas region.
Provide support to foster children and at risk families in Comal County Texas. Provide emergency support to victims of child abuse.
Lone Star CASA elevates the voices of children in Kaufman and Rockwall County who have experienced abuse and neglect by providing trained volunteer advocates to work alongside children and families so they can achieve safety and stability…
The west texas boys ranch foundation raises, collects, accumulates, manages, and distributes the funds necessary for the west texas boys ranch, a related 501(c)(3) organization.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Casa of West Texas and the most unlike its peers is Heritage Museum of Big Spring. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 53 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds UMC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HOWARD COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
- Who funds The West Texas Rehabilitation Center ↗
- Who funds Memorial Hermann Foundation ↗
- Who funds CASA OF WEST TEXAS ↗
- Who funds WESTSIDE COMMUNITY DAYCARE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN OPPORTUNITY INC ↗
- Who funds WEST TEXAS FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds RAPE CRISIS SERVICES OF BIG SPRING ↗
- Who funds WEST TEXAS BOYS RANCH ↗
- Who funds CONCHO VALLEY HOME FOR GIRLS INC ↗
- Who funds HERITAGE MUSEUM OF BIG SPRING ↗
- Who funds NEW HORIZONS RANCH & CENTER INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Dora Roberts Foundation - Fi Xxxxx4008 · Fmh Foundation · Permian Basin Area Foundation · Big Spring Area Community Foundation Inc · San Angelo Health Foundation · Wayne & Jo Ann Moore Charitable Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Broughton Foundation Trust funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Broughton Foundation Trust?
Find your warmest path to Broughton Foundation Trust 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.