Skip to content
G-Unity Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

G-Unity Foundation

Youth programs

$164k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Education$464kRecreation & Sports$267kHealth$100kYouth Development$83kPhilanthropy$20kHuman Services$13kCrime & Legal$10k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $157,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $164,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $6,500 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.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $150k
$50,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$755k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TRU OUTREACH$100,000
NETWORK FOR TEACHING ENTREPRENEURSHIP$50,000
FAMILY HOUSTON$7,500
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 (FY20–20, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%PFA CHARITIES INC: $5k → 15%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
Jack Gives Back Foundation
Philanthropy
2
Compassionate Houston Inc

Promote compassionate culture in Houston area

Human Services
3
Jx Gives Back Family Foundation Inc
Philanthropy
4
Texas Bankers Foundation
Education
5
Good News Foundation of Texas
Philanthropy
6
Heb Tournament of Champions Charitable Trust
Philanthropy
7
The Giving Rose Foundation Atx
Public Benefit
8
Reachout Foundation Inc
Education
9
Houston Family Association
—
10
Consolation Community Outreach

Consoation Commnity Outreach main purpose is to feed low income and poor families, we also provide them with daily needed essentials for free.

Human Services
11
Famcore Foundation Inc

FamCore Foundation is a non-profit organization operating across multiple states (LA, TX) committed to raising funds to feed and help those in need through our annual Christmas and Thanksgiving Drives as well as through any other means in…

Food & Nutrition
12
Metro Sports Fieldhouse

Metro Sports Fieldhouse (MSF) is a Texas based non-profit organization utilizing sports as a vehicle to help youth develop essential life skills. Our vision is to empower youth to realize their full potential by equipping them with the…

Recreation & Sports
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Network for Teaching Entrepreneurship; the most unlike its peers is Cactus Jack 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.
04the grantee network

9 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. 9 of the 12 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT: $450,000 · OtherHOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT+2 more: $21,495 · OtherHOUSTON LIVESTOCK SHOW AND RODEO INC: $266,950 · Recreation & SportsHOUSTON LIVESTOCK SHOW AND RODE…TRU OUTREACH INC: $100,000 · HealthTRU OUTREAC…NETWORK FOR TEACHING ENTREPRENEURSHIP: $50,000 · Youth DevelopmentHOUSTON TEXANS FOUNDATION: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentCACTUS JACK FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 · PhilanthropyFamily Service Center of Houston and Harris County: $7,500 · Human ServicesPFA CHARITIES INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesANGEL BY NATURE: $10,000 · Crime & LegalCHIGIVESBACK INC: $5,000 · Community Improvement
Other$471,495Recreation & Sports$266,950Health$100,000Youth Development$75,000Philanthropy$15,000Human Services$12,500Crime & Legal$10,000Community Improvement$5,000

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 budgetHOUSTON LIVESTOCK SHOW AND RODEO INC: $266,950 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetNETWORK FOR TEACHING ENTREPRENEURSHIP: $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetHOUSTON TEXANS FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetCACTUS JACK FOUNDATION INC: $15,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetANGEL BY NATURE: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetFamily Service Center of Houston and Harris County: $7,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCHIGIVESBACK INC: $5,000 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetPFA CHARITIES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 3.0% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Astros Foundation
Astros FoundationTX13.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Astros 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 G-Unity Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from G-Unity Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–5%
    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 12 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on G-Unity’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