Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

Carol A Buch Foundation

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.

$25k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
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 FY2018–2025.

Science & Tech$100kEducation$74kCrime & Legal$41kHuman Services$34kHealth$19kInternational$13kReligion$8kHousing & Shelter$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $5k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
$2,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$515k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE SAFE ALLIANCE$10,200
CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTERS OF TEXAS INC$10,000
COVENANT HOUSE$2,000
BETA THETA PI FOUNDATION$1,839
ST STEPHENS EPISCOPAL SCHOOL$1,000
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:

Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 57% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%COVENANT HOUSE: $2k → 17%WONDERS & WORRIES INC: $1k → 10%WONDERS & WORRIES INC: $500 → 10%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

MI
NY
IN
OH
PA
CA
MO
MD
TN
DC
OK
GA
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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$272k · 18 repeat orgs$29k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +29% since the first grant, against +3% for the ones you funded once.

18 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
28

Total granted

$272k
$27k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+3%

Still filing today

89%
82%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthEducationInternationalHousing & ShelterPhilanthropyCrime & LegalOther

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

  • CA
    CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF TEXAS INC
    4× · 2021–2025 · $35k · revenue +24%
  • TS
    THE SAFE ALLIANCE
    5× · 2019–2025 · $31k · revenue +54%
  • WA
    WELL AWARE INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $11k · revenue +17%

Funded once

  • WC
    WILLIAMSON COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC
    one grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue -8%
  • MA
    METROPOLITAN A M E CHURCH
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
  • TS
    The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Incgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue +38%

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

04Your field

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.

1
Curesearch for Children's Cancer

Curesearch's mission is to fund & support targeted & innovative cancer research with measurable results, & to be the authoritative source of information & resources for all those affected by children's cancer. see schedule o for…

Health
2
Cook Children's Medical Center - Prosper

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease and injury.

Health
3
Cook Children's Health Plan

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease, and injury.

Health
4
Cook Children's Physician Network

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease, and injury.

Health
5
The Children's Cancer Cause Inc

The mission of children's cancer cause is to champion policies and programs that improve the lives of children with cancer and survivors.

Health
6
National Comprehensive Cancer Network

To define and advance quality, effective, equitable, and accessible cancer care and prevention so all people can live better lives.

Health
7
Child Abuse Network Inc dba Child Advocacy Network

In Tulsa County there are several agencies that address prevention and treatment of child abuse, but the Child Advocacy Network (CAN) is the ONLY nonprofit that provides intervention services for children and their nonoffending…

Crime & Legal
8
Children's Health System of Texas

With more than 1 million patient visits each year, Children's Health is North Texas' leading pediatric health system and among the largest in the nation. For more than a century, our mission has been clear: make life better for children.…

Health
9
Cook Children's Home Health

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through the prevention and treatment of illness, disease, and injury.

Health
10
Wi Cook Foundation Inc

Knowing that every child's life is sacred, our promise is to improve the health of every child in our region through prevention and treatment of illness, disease, and injury.

Health
11
Children's Hospital Corporation

Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service

Health
12
Cancer Research and Biostatistics

To help conquer cancer and other diseases through the application of biostatistical principles and innovative data management methods.

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Central & South Texas and the most unlike its peers is Kylie Rowand Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyCommunity College Foundatio…Child Abuse Advocacy Servic…Domestic Violence ServicesIndependent K-12 SchoolsUnited Way AffiliatesCommunity FoundationsYouth Development CentersChristian Missionary Organi…Food Banks and PantriesCancer Support ServicesHealth Access Advocacy and …
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 35 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number26%3%<5yr16%8%5–10yr20%13%10–20yr16%28%20–35yr10%30%35–55yr13%20%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value26%2%<5yr16%12%5–10yr20%7%10–20yr16%6%20–35yr10%15%35–55yr13%59%55yr+

The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/43
the rest of the field
15%
20,233/136,761

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

04the grantee network

40 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. 40 of the 47 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)
40/40
Grantees still filing
25/40
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Purdue Research Foundation — $100,000 · EducationPurdue Research FoundationBETA THETA PI FOUNDATION — $7,356 · EducationBETA THETA PI FOUNDATION+3 more — $5,500 · EducationST STEPHENS EPISCOPAL SCHOOL — $59,500 · OtherST STEPHENS EPISCOPAL SCHOOLTHE SAFE ALLIANCE — $31,200 · OtherTHE SAFE ALLIANCEMETROPOLITAN A M E CHURCH — $5,000 · OtherSAINT PAULS LUTHERAN CHURCH — $4,000 · Other+21 more — $16,850 · Other+21 moreCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF TEXAS INC — $35,000 · Crime & LegalCHILDREN'S ADVO…WILLIAMSON COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC — $5,000 · Crime & LegalWILLIAMSON COUN…ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC — $8,500 · HealthThe Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc — $1,500 · HealthPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC — $600 · HealthCarter BloodCare — $500 · HealthIMAGINE A WAY — $500 · HealthCRUSH CHILDHOOD CANCER INC — $500 · HealthCook Children's Medical Center — $500 · HealthKylie Rowand Foundation Inc — $500 · HealthAMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION — $500 · Health+1 more — $250 · HealthWELL AWARE INC — $10,700 · InternationalLUTHERAN WORLD RELIEF INC — $500 · InternationalCOVENANT HOUSE — $2,000 · Human ServicesWonders & Worries Inc — $1,500 · Human ServicesCentral Texas Food Bank Inc — $2,500 · Food & Nutrition
Education$112,856Other$116,550Crime & Legal$40,000Health$13,850International$11,200Human Services$3,500Food & Nutrition$2,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetPurdue Research Foundation — $100,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTERS OF TEXAS INC — $35,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SAFE ALLIANCE — $31,200 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetWELL AWARE INC — $10,700 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC — $8,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetBETA THETA PI FOUNDATION — $7,356 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWILLIAMSON COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetKIPP Texas Inc — $3,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCentral Texas Food Bank Inc — $2,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCOVENANT HOUSE — $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc — $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMISSION DISCOVERY INC — $1,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetFOUNDATION COMMUNITIES INC — $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWonders & Worries Inc — $1,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE NATIONAL CHILDREN'S CANCER SOCIETY — $1,150 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetKids Hope USA — $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetVOLUNTEERS IN SERVICE TO OTHERS — $1,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY PARTNERS — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Nobelity Project — $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF COOKE COUNTY INC — $1,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC — $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNASHVILLE RESCUE MISSION — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCARITAS OF AUSTIN — $750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPANCREATIC CANCER ACTION NETWORK INC — $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCarter BloodCare — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ARC OF THE CAPITAL AREA — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF NORTH TEXAS INC — $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLUTHERAN WORLD RELIEF INC — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIMAGINE A WAY — $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED WAY OF PAYNE COUNTY INC — $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNAMI Central Texas — $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF CENTRAL & SOUTH TEXAS — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCook Children's Medical Center — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS & FAMILY COMMUNITY CONNECTION — $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKylie Rowand Foundation Inc — $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE PREVENTION — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF COLLIN COUNTY INC — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSMILE TRAIN INC — $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWE ARE BLOOD — $250 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.

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.

Austin Community Foun…Communities Foundatio…United Way WorldwideGreater Houston Commu…Shell USA Company Fou…Shield-Ayres Foundati…St David's FoundationThe Moody FoundationThe Blackbaud Giving …Aetna Foundation IncTextron Charitable Tr…Enterprise Holdings F…
Austin Community Foundation IncTX22.5× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Austin Community Foundation Inc · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · United Way Worldwide · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Shield-Ayres Foundation · St David's Foundation · The Moody Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Aetna Foundation Inc · Textron Charitable Trust Dtd 122353 · Enterprise Holdings 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 Carol A Buch Foundation 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 47%
  • Lutheran World Relief Inc — 47% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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 47 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

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines