Skip to content

· Public charity

El Buen Samaritano Episcopal Mission

El Buen Samaritano Episcopal Mission (el buen) is one of the largest latino-serving organizations in central texas and has served as a trusted community anchor since 1987.

$3.0M
Granted FY2021
1
Grants FY2021
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
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 2021.

Health$124kHuman Services$85kYouth Development$10k
02FY2021 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $50,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,991,870 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,941,870 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.
$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$8.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Lone Star Circle of Care$50,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–20, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%Austin Area Urban Leauge: $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

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
The Alliance for Community Wellness Dba La Familia Counseling Services

La Familia Counseling Service is an inclusive Latino community-based, multi-cultural organization committed to strengthening the emotional wellness of individuals and the preservation of families.

—
2
Asian American Resource Center Inc

To improve the health and well-being of Asians and Asian Americans in Central Texas through education advocacy and support. A new contracted outreach program with Central Health began to conduct community outreach for the Medical Access…

Recreation & Sports
3
Guadalupe County Children's Advocacy Center

To advocate for and provide services to children and families when there are allegations of abuse and neglect throughout the investigation,prosecution, treatment, and prevention of child abuse, and to reduce the trauma to childrent with…

Crime & Legal
4
Latino Leadership Council Inc

To advance the wellness and leadership capacity of Latino populations.

Health
5
Healthy Family Services of Texas Inc

To provide high-quality, evidence-informed healthcare services to individuals and families, regardless of their ability to pay.

Health
6
Vuela for Health

Vuelas mission is to unite and engage Latino communities through education, collaboration, and leadership development, to improve the physical, mental, social, and emotional well-being of participants and their families.

Community Improvement
7
Black Mamas Community Collective

The mission of Black Mamas ATX is to ensure that Black women survive and thrive before, during and after childbirth. We envision a world without maternal health disparities. Our goal is to reduce and ultimately eliminate the alarming…

Human Services
8
Vida Y Salud Health Systems Inc

Vida Y Salud-Health Systems, Inc. was founded in 1972 and provides health services to the people of Zavala,Dimmit,LaSalle,Uvalde and surrounding counties. The clinic maintains four program/service delivery sites and provides services such…

Health
9
Alliance for African American Health in Central Texas

A Better Me Wellness Program provided support to individuals attempting to make lifestyle changes to reduce their risk of chronic disease or better manage existing conditions. The program provides support from health coaches and resources…

Health
10
Embrace All Latino Voices

To provide equitable social navigation services and programs to low income communities advancing access to essential resources health and economic stability

Human Services
11
Healthy Families San Angelo

To enhance the ability of families to protect, nuture, and educate their children in the first five years of life and enable them to enter school ready to learn.

—
12
Austin Allies

Austin Allies' mission is to organize meaningful volunteer opportunities for families in the Greater Austin area by partnering with local nonprofits and those that they serve. Austin Allies is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization started by…

Youth Development
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Any Baby Can of Austin Inc; the most unlike its peers is Todos Juntos Learning Center. 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

8 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. 8 of the 10 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

The Physician Board of El Buen: $43,761 · OtherThe Physician Board of El BuenANY BABY CAN OF AUSTIN INC: $20,000 · OtherANY BABY CAN OF AUSTIN INCAVANCE INC: $20,000 · OtherAVANCE INCCommunity Coalition of Health: $20,000 · OtherCommunity Coalition of HealthLONE STAR CIRCLE OF CARE: $50,000 · HealthLONE STAR CIRCLE OF CAREPromoSalud: $10,000 · HealthPromoSaludAustin Area Urban League: $20,000 · Human ServicesAustin Are…Todos Juntos Learning Center: $15,000 · EducationSAHELI: $10,000 · Community ImprovementGo AustinVamos Austin: $10,000 · Youth Development
Other$103,761Health$60,000Human Services$20,000Education$15,000Community Improvement$10,000Youth Development$10,000

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 budgetLONE STAR CIRCLE OF CARE: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe Physician Board of El Buen: $43,761 over 3y, 3.7% of budgetAustin Area Urban League: $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetANY BABY CAN OF AUSTIN INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTodos Juntos Learning Center: $15,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetSAHELI: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGo AustinVamos Austin: $10,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetPromoSalud: $10,000 over 1y, 1.2% 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.

Austin Community Foundation IncTX21.5× affinity8 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Austin Community Foundation Inc · St David's Foundation · United Way for Greater Austin · Texas Mutual Insurance Company · Episcopal Health Foundation · The Moody Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 El Buen Samaritano Episcopal Mission funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from El Buen Samaritano Episcopal Mission. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 10 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $9.0M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2021, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on El Buen Samaritano Episcopal Mission’s filings →

    More from the funding graph