Skip to content
Caprock Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Caprock Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$30k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$11k
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.

Food & Nutrition$67kHuman Services$61kEducation$29kHealth$19kCrime & Legal$7kHousing & Shelter$5k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $19k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $11k
$8,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$729
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$10,800
REFUGE SERVICES$8,000
MEALS ON WHEELS$6,200
Individual grant recipient$4,500
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 (FY17–25, $56k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 16%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 16%HIGH POINT VILLAGE: $1k → 17%REFUGE SERVICES: $8k → 17%REFUGE SERVICES: $7k → 17%MEALS ON WHEELS: $18k → 17%MEALS ON WHEELS: $6k → 17%MEALS ON WHEELS: $3k → 17%One Voice Home: $6k → 17%LUBBOCK IMPACT: $7k → 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.

44%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$96k · 3 repeat orgs$120k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +19% since the first grant, against +1% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
12

Total granted

$96k
$105k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+19%
+1%

Still filing today

100%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesFood & NutritionEducationCrime & LegalOther
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

  • SP
    SOUTH PLAINS FOOD BANK INC
    3× · 2018–2021 · $44k · revenue +20%
  • MO
    MEALS ON WHEELS
    3× · 2021–2025 · $27k · revenue +19%
  • RS
    REFUGE SERVICES INC
    3× · 2017–2025 · $25k · revenue -4%

Funded once

  • TT
    TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2024 · $25k · revenue 0%
  • C
    CASA
    one grant, 2023 · $25k
  • LC
    LUBBOCK CHILDRENS HEALTH CLINICgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $19k · revenue +45%
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
Children's Home of Lubbock and Family Service Agency Inc

Working in creative collaboration to provide quality care that transforms the lives of at-risk children and their families through the active compassion of christ.

Human Services
2
Community Health Center of Lubbock Inc

Provide quality primary and preventataive health care services to those in need.

Health
3
Lubbock Family Outreach Center Inc Dba Family Guidance & Outreach Center

The Family Guidance & Outreach Center of Lubbock is dedicated to the prevention of child abuse and neglect and supporting, mentoring, and educating parents.

Human Services
4
Lubbock Area United Way Inc

Giving people hope. working to address the root issues of the significant challenges facing our south plains communities to create lasting, positive change.

Philanthropy
5
Lubbock Chamber of Commerce

The lubbock chamber of commerce provides promotion of business and community growth and development as well as preserving the competitive business enterprise system in the lubbock and surrounding area.

—
6
Lubbock Christian School

Lubbock christian school is dedicated to providing a quality environment in which each student will grow in wisdom and stature and in favor with god and man. lcs strives for excellence spiritually, personally, and professionally among…

Education
7
Womens Sober House of Lufkin Inc

The Mantooth House is a Recovery Residence for Chemically Dependent adult women who have successfully completed primary treatment and are in early, but active recovery. We exist to provide quality recovery housing and bridge the gap…

Health
8
Lubbock County Junior Livestock Association

Promoting agricultural education, leadership and agricultural entrepreneurship in the youth of lubbock county, texas; encouraging and recognizing the achievement of youth in agriculture and livestock management; encouraging youth academic…

Youth Development
9
Goodwill Industries of Lubbock Contract Services Inc

Goodwill is a local nonprofit helping people overcome challenges, build skills, find jobs and grow careers.

Employment
10
Goodwill Industries of Lubbock Inc

Goodwill is a local nonprofit helping people overcome challenges, build skills, find jobs and grow careers.

Employment
11
Lubbock Christian University Foundation

Raising funds to support the activities of lubbock christian university and to fund capital projects for instructional facilities for lubbock christian university.

Education
12
Lubbock Lutheran Retirement Corporation

To provide help, healing and hope in the name of jesus christ.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Lubbock Impact Inc; the most unlike its peers is Meals On Wheels. 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

11 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. 11 of the 17 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)
11/11
Grantees still filing
6/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CASA: $24,599 · OtherCASALUBBOCK CHILDRENS HEALTH CLINIC: $18,677 · OtherLUBBOCK CHILDRENS HEALTH CLINICIndividual grant recipient: $10,800 · OtherIndividual grant recipientLLANO ESTACADO SILVER STAR BOARD: $5,000 · OtherLLANO ESTACADO SILVER STAR BOARDIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $4,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $3,500 · OtherMEALS ON WHEELS: $27,051 · Human ServicesMEALS ON WHEELSREFUGE SERVICES INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesREFUGE SERVICES INCLUBBOCK IMPACT INC: $7,000 · Human ServicesLUBBOCK IMPACT INCONE VOICE HOME: $6,000 · Human ServicesONE VOICE HOME+1 more: $1,000 · Human ServicesSOUTH PLAINS FOOD BANK INC: $44,210 · Food & NutritionSOUTH PLAINS FOOD BANK I…LUBBOCK MEALS ON WHEELS INC: $1,700 · Food & NutritionTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 · EducationTEXAS TECH FO…+1 more: $500 · EducationCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF THE SOUTH PLAINS: $7,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$72,076Human Services$66,051Food & Nutrition$45,910Education$25,500Crime & Legal$7,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSOUTH PLAINS FOOD BANK INC: $44,210 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS: $27,051 over 3y, 14% of budgetREFUGE SERVICES INC: $25,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLUBBOCK CHILDRENS HEALTH CLINIC: $18,677 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF THE SOUTH PLAINS: $7,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetLUBBOCK IMPACT INC: $7,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetONE VOICE HOME: $6,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetLUBBOCK MEALS ON WHEELS INC: $1,700 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHIGH POINT VILLAGE INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWAYLAND BAPTIST UNIVERSITY: $500 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.

Community Foundation …Ch Foundation IncSouth Plains Foundati…Kuykendall FoundationHDS FoundationPickering Family Foun…Rushing Family Founda…Welborn-Payne Endowme…Diekemper Family Foun…Carl C Anderson Sr an…Xcel Energy FoundationThe Pfizer Foundation…
Community Foundation of West TexasTX26.3× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of West Texas · Ch Foundation Inc · South Plains Foundation · Kuykendall Foundation · HDS Foundation · Pickering Family Foundation · Rushing Family Foundation · Welborn-Payne Endowment Trust · Diekemper Family Foundation Inc · Carl C Anderson Sr and Marie Jo Anderson Charitable Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · The Pfizer Foundation 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 Caprock Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Caprock Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 Caprock Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Caprock 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 17 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Caprock’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