Skip to content

· Private foundation

Flm Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$23k
Granted FY2022
5
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2022.

Education$68kCommunity Improvement$16kHealth$15kHuman Services$12kYouth Development$5kCrime & Legal$3kArts & Culture$1kOther$0
02FY2022 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$4,042
Median grant
1
States reached
$389k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ROTARY CLUB OF NEW BRAUNFELS$7,543
CHILDREN AT HEART FOUNDATION$4,043
RESOURCES FOR WOMEN$4,042
OPTIONS FOR LIFE$4,042
BAYLOR SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK$3,006
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 (FY19–22, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%RESOURCES FOR WOMEN: $4k → 7%RESOURCES FOR WOMEN: $4k → 7%RESOURCES FOR WOMEN: $1k → 7%RESOURCES FOR WOMEN: $1k → 7%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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$118k · 9 repeat orgs$4k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2022, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
1

Total granted

$118k
$1k

Still filing today

56%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
EducationCrime & LegalHuman ServicesOther
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

  • BAYLOR UNIVERSITY
    4× · 2017–2020 · $44k · revenue +57%
  • CA
    CHILDREN AT HEART FOUNDATION INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $21k · revenue +46%
  • CP
    Crisis Pregnancy Center of New Braunfels
    3× · 2020–2022 · $11k · revenue +29%

Funded once

  • NM
    NB Masonic Historical Mueseam Libra
    one grant, 2018 · $1k
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
South Texas Pregnancy Care Center

Crisis pregnancy counseling.

Health
2
Hope Pregnancy Center Inc

Provide emotional and practical assistance in a crisis pregnancy.

Health
3
Central Texas Pregnancy Care Center

Pregnancy counseling

Human Services
4
Austin Lifecare

Austin Lifecare dba The Source exists to support, care for and equip women by providing high-quality, whole person health services.

Health
5
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
6
Comal County Child Welfare Board

Provide support to foster children and at risk families in Comal County Texas. Provide emergency support to victims of child abuse.

—
7
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Milam County
—
8
Texas Foster Care & Adoption Serv

A state of texas licensed foster care and adoption agency that identifies and provides approved healing foster homes for children.

Human Services
9
Northeast Texas Child Advocacy Center Inc

To bring hope and healing while working together to break the cycle of child abuse.

Human Services
10
Childrens Advocacy Center of Laredo-Web

The center is fully operational treatment facility involving child victims of physical and sexual abuse. Children affected by abuse were provided with therapy and professional guidance through the legal and counseling system which the…

Health
11
Options Pregnancy Clinic

Orginizations mission to provide free pregnancy/parenting services to women and their familes facing unplanned pregnancies, and to provide limited std testing and treatment. to offer compassionate assistance regarding sexual integrity,…

Health
12
Bluebonnet Childrens Center

To protect and enhance the quality of life for abused and neglected children in Medina, Real and Uvalde Counties of Texas.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children At Heart Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is New Braunfels Trail Team 6. 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

7 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. 7 of the 11 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)
5/7
Grantees still filing
6/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BAYLOR UNIVERSITY: $43,802 · EducationBAYLOR UNIVERSITYCHILDREN AT HEART FOUNDATION INC: $21,210 · EducationCHILDREN AT HEART FOUNDATION INCROTARY CLUB OF NEW BRAUNFELS: $15,905 · OtherROTARY CLUB OF NEW BRAUNFELSCrisis Pregnancy Center of New Braunfels: $10,905 · OtherCrisis Pregnancy Center of New BraunfelsIndividual grant recipient: $6,203 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTEAM YOUTH FOUNDATION: $4,910 · OtherTEAM YOUTH FOUNDATIONBAYLOR SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK: $3,006 · OtherBAYLOR SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORKServe Outdoors Inc MO: $1,964 · Other+1 more: $1,000 · OtherRESOURCES FOR WOMEN INC: $10,405 · Human ServicesRESOURCES…CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF COMAL COUN: $3,068 · Crime & Legal
Education$65,012Other$43,893Human Services$10,405Crime & Legal$3,068

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBAYLOR UNIVERSITY: $43,802 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDREN AT HEART FOUNDATION INC: $21,210 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCrisis Pregnancy Center of New Braunfels: $10,905 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetRESOURCES FOR WOMEN INC: $10,405 over 4y, 1.6% of budgetTEAM YOUTH FOUNDATION: $4,910 over 2y, 9.7% of budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF COMAL COUN: $3,068 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetServe Outdoors Inc MO: $1,964 over 2y, 0.8% 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.

  • Who funds BAYLOR UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN AT HEART FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Crisis Pregnancy Center of New Braunfels ↗
  • Who funds RESOURCES FOR WOMEN INC ↗
  • Who funds TEAM YOUTH FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF COMAL COUN ↗
  • Who funds Serve Outdoors Inc MO ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Flm Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Flm Foundation. 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%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 Flm Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Flm Foundation 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 11 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Flm’s filings →

    More from the funding graph