Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Burch Settoon Student Loan Tru

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$74k
Granted FY2025still arriving
24
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202025.

Education$411kRecreation & Sports$6kAnimals$3k
02FY2025 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$2,860
Median grant
1
States reached
$980k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MIDWESTERN STATE UNIVERSITY$4,510
TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY$4,510
MIDWESTERN STATE UNIVERSITY$4,510
TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY$4,010
WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY$4,010
TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY$3,760
WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY$3,760
TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY$3,760
WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY$3,760
TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY$3,010
TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY$3,010
WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY$2,860
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS$2,860
TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY$2,860
TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY$2,860
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 60% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%HASTINGS COLLEGE FBO SARA CASNER: $3k → 11%SOUTHWESTERN UNIV FBO ZACHARY COLLINS: $3k → 6%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIV FBO ISAAC MORALEZ: $5k → 9%TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY: $3k → 10%UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS: $3k → 10%ANGELO STATE UNIVERSITY: $2k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF MARY HARDIN BAYLOR: $2k → 14%LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIV FBO KOLE MAYBER: $5k → 15%MIDWESTERN STATE UNIVERSITY: $5k → 16%TEXAS A&M UNIV CORPUS CHRISTI FBO: $3k → 17%ABILENE CHRISTIAN UNIV FBO JETT PATTER: $4k → 22%TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $5k → 22%SOUTHWESTERN OKLAHOMA FBO PEYTON MCNUTT: $4k → 16%KANSAS ST UNIV FBO KARI SCHULTE: $5k → 20%BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIV FBO EMMA PARKER: $2k → 8%SOUTHWESTERN UNIV FBO ZACHARY COLLINS: $1k → 6%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $4k → 9%LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIV FBO ALEXA ROSAS: $3k → 15%MIDWESTERN STATE UNIVERSITY: $5k → 16%ABILENE CHRISTIAN UNIV FBO: $3k → 22%TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $4k → 22%SOUTHWESTERN OKLAHOMA FBO PEYTON MCNUTT: $2k → 16%KANSAS ST UNIV FBO KARI SCHULTE: $2k → 20%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $4k → 9%LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY: $3k → 15%TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $3k → 22%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $4k → 9%LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY: $3k → 15%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIV FBO ELIZABETH TERR: $3k → 9%LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIV FBO: $3k → 15%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIV FBO JOSEPH MORALEZ: $3k → 9%SOUTH PLAINS COLLEGE FBO EDGAR DELGADO: $5k → 15%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIV FBO ALYSSA TREVINO: $3k → 9%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $3k → 9%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIV FBO KOOPER COX: $3k → 9%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY: $2k → 9%WEST TEXAS A&M UNIV FBO ISAAC MORALEZ: $1k → 9%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

Which US states your grants reach

MA
NJ
UT
CO
NE
NM
KS
OK
MS
TX

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

37%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$155k · 13 repeat orgs$265k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
87

Total granted

$155k
$246k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+17%
+250%

Still filing today

8%
2%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $19k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

  • TT
    TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $47k
  • WT
    WEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $33k
  • TA
    TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2024–2025 · $14k

Funded once

  • TT
    TEXAS TECH UNIV FBO MARY JOLLY
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • TT
    TEXAS TECH UNIV FBO BRANDON MARQUEZ
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • LC
    LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIV FBO KOLE MAYBER
    one grant, 2022 · $5k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

4 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 4 of the 105 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/4
Grantees still filing
3/4
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

TEXAS TECH UNIVERSITY — $47,287 · OtherTEXAS TECH UNIVERSITYWEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY — $32,739 · OtherWEST TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITYTEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY — $13,571 · Other+98 more — $309,213 · Other+98 moreLUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY — $9,812 · EducationTEXAS A&M-CORPUS CHRISTI FOUNDATION — $3,000 · EducationSOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY — $2,292 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF MARY HARDIN-BAYLOR — $2,260 · Education
Other$402,810Education$17,364

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetLUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY — $9,812 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTEXAS A&M-CORPUS CHRISTI FOUNDATION — $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSOUTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY — $2,292 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF MARY HARDIN-BAYLOR — $2,260 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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 LUBBOCK CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Tulsa Community FoundationOK13.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tulsa Community 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 Burch Settoon Student Loan Tru 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.

2025
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your 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, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 105 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph