· Private foundation
Gene Conley Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $25k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $159k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $286k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH QUANAH TEXAS | $85,000 |
| TEXAS SCOTTISH RITE HOSPITAL FOR | $80,500 |
| NORTHWEST TX COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OF AMER | $60,000 |
| BOYS CLUB OF BURKBURNETT | $60,000 |
| WICHITA FALLS AREA FOOD BANK | $25,000 |
| CHILD ADVOCATES CASA OF RED RIVER | $25,000 |
| SOUTHERN GRIT ADVOCACY | $21,000 |
| THE ARC OF TEXAS | $15,000 |
| ZAVALA HISPANIC CULTURAL INITIATIVE | $12,500 |
| RIVER BEND NATURE WORKS | $10,000 |
| PATSY'S HOUSE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CETR I | $10,000 |
| CATHOLIC CHARITIES DIOCESE OF FORT WORTH | $10,000 |
| PETS LOW COST SPAY AND NEUTER CLINIC | $10,000 |
| GENESIS WOMENS SHELTER & SUPPORT | $10,000 |
| INTERFAITH MINISTRIES OF WICHITA FALLS I | $10,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $270k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 85% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +12% since the first grant, against +9% for the ones you funded once.
28 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 16 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $124k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- BABoys and Girls Club of Vernon Inc5× · 2020–2024 · $351k · revenue +23%
- BCBOYS CLUB OF BURKBURNETT BURKBURNETT BOYS & GIRLS CLUB5× · 2020–2025 · $203k · revenue +40%
- CAChild Advocates CASA of Red River4× · 2020–2025 · $91k · revenue +32%
Funded once
- NTNORTHWEST TEXAS COUNCIL BOY SCOUTS OFone grant, 2024 · $50k
- TSTHOMPSON SAWYER PUBLIC LIBRARYone grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue -47%
- HCHARDEMAN COUNTY ESSENTIALS CENTERone grant, 2021 · $20k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
The Organizations mission is to bring unity and efficiency to investigations of child abuse through the use of a multi-disciplinary team and, thereby, to provide the best possible services to victims of child abuse and their families.
To provide family services and to provide residential child care for dependent children where there is a need to assist children and families disrupted by problems.
Care, hope, and support for all when illness threatens life.
The mission of the Wichita Falls Area Community Foundation is to enhance the quality of life in the Wichita Falls area through the promotion and support of charitable giving. Our vision is to build strong, vibrant communities inspired by…
To recruit, train and supervise volunteers that advocate in the best interests of abused and neglected children in court.
Lone Star CASA elevates the voices of children in Kaufman and Rockwall County who have experienced abuse and neglect by providing trained volunteer advocates to work alongside children and families so they can achieve safety and stability…
CASA of Williamson County, TX exists to empower community volunteers to advocate for children who have experienced abuse or neglect to find loving, safe, and permanent homes.
The mission of casa of west texas is to recruit, train and support committed volunteers who are appointed by the court to advocate for the best interest of children in the foster care system.
Formerly ywca wichita, the wichita family crisis center (wfcc) began operations in wichita, ks in 1907. wfcc's mission is to eliminate domestic violence in our community by supporting survivors through shelter, education & advocacy.
To provide services designed to meet the physical, social, and emotional needs of domestic violence and sexual assault victims by providing for immediate, short, and long-term needs.
To procure and distribute nutritional food to qualified agencies that feed the hungry of West Central Texas.
To protect and enhance the quality of life for abused and neglected children in Medina, Real and Uvalde Counties of Texas.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Interfaith Ministries of Wichita Falls Inc Dba Interfaith Outreach Services and the most unlike its peers is Quanah High School Alumni Association. 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.
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 31 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 18% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
36 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. 36 of the 52 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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.
- Who funds Boys and Girls Club of Vernon Inc ↗
- Who funds BOYS CLUB OF BURKBURNETT BURKBURNETT BOYS & GIRLS CLUB ↗
- Who funds CHILD CARE INC ↗
- Who funds Child Advocates CASA of Red River ↗
- Who funds Patsy's House Children's Advocacy Center ↗
- Who funds HARDEMAN COUNTY MUSEUM & HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Texoma Alliance to Stop Abuse ↗
- Who funds WICHITA FALLS FAITH MISSION INC ↗
- Who funds INTERFAITH MINISTRIES OF WICHITA FALLS INC DBA INTERFAITH OUTREACH SERVICES ↗
- Who funds WICHITA FALLS AREA FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN GRIT ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES DIOCESE OF FORT WORTH ↗
- Who funds CHRIST COUNSELING MINISTRY INC ↗
- Who funds E EUGENE JOHNSON MEMORIAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ZAVALA HISPANIC CULTURAL INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds Arts Council Wichita Falls Area Inc ↗
- Who funds THOMPSON SAWYER PUBLIC LIBRARY ↗
- Who funds HARDEMAN COUNTY ESSENTIALS CENTER ↗
- Who funds CAMP FIRE WEST TEXAS ↗
- Who funds PRESBYTERIAN CHILDREN'S HOMES & SERVICES ↗
- Who funds Wichita Falls Symphony Orchestra ↗
- Who funds Project Back to School ↗
- Who funds THE ARC OF WICHITA COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds TFI FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds Red River Valley Museum ↗
- Who funds THE BOYS CLUB OF WICHITA FALLS INC DBA BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF WICHITA FALLS ↗
- Who funds CAMP FIRE NORTH TEXAS ↗
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.
Open a dossier: The Priddy Foundation · James N McCoy Foundation · Wichita Falls Area Community Foundation · The Fain Foundation · Bryant Edwards Foundation Inc · J S Bridwell Foundation · Donnell Foundation · Guinn Foundation Inc · Libra Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Leota Steed Foundation · Dillard Family 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 Gene Conley 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Gene Conley Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Gene Conley 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.