Skip to content
Georgia and William S Dubose Fnd at a glance

· Private foundation

Georgia and William S Dubose Fnd

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.

$65k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$27k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0183% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2022 to 2025.

Health$26kEducation$12kPublic Safety & Disaster$11kYouth Development$10kHousing & Shelter$10kCrime & Legal$9kReligion$9kFood & Nutrition$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $58k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$27,300
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF CUERO$10,330
THE VINE SCHOOL$10,000
GOLDEN CRESCENT HABITAT FOR HUMANIT$10,000
CASA OF TRAVIS COUNTY$3,911
TEAM GLEASON FOUNDATION$3,911
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 (FY25–25, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 23%, 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%TEAM GLEASON FOUNDATION: $4k → 23%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.

38%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$66k · 4 repeat orgs$107k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
9

Total granted

$66k
$56k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+10%
+15%

Still filing today

75%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 21% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $52k went to new ones.

50%100%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
EducationReligionYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesHealthPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    2× · 2023–2024 · $33k
  • TV
    THE VINE SCHOOL
    3× · 2023–2025 · $18k · revenue +44%
  • CA
    COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF TRAVIS COUNTY
    3× · 2023–2025 · $9k · revenue -10%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $15k
  • WV
    WESTHOFF VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT
    one grant, 2022 · $11k
  • TE
    TRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCH
    one grant, 2022 · $9k
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
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Milam County
—
2
Court Appointed Special Advocates Casa of Liberty/Chambers Counties

None

Human Services
3
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
4
Casa for the Cross Timbers Area Inc

Recruit and train community volunteers to speak out for abused and neglected children in court proceedings.

Human Services
5
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
6
Sunny Glen Children's Home Inc

Sunny Glen Childrens Home, Inc. cares for children in need. Our care will be competent, compassionate and professional. We will help every child achieve their greatest potential-physically, emotionally, spiritually and academically.

Human Services
7
Casa of Williamson County Texas

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.

Crime & Legal
8
Chaves County Casa Program

To provide needed services for abused, neglected, and vulnerable children and their families.

Human Services
9
Casa of the Tennessee Valley

The mission of the organization is to provide a powerful voice for abused and neglected children by advocating for each child, within the court's jurisdiction, in order to ensure safety, permancy and an opportunity to thrive.

Human Services
10
Gulf Coast Casa

Protect abused and neglected children.

Civil Rights
11
Court Appointed Special Advocates in the Heart of Texas

Training and supporting quality volunteers who speak out for the best interest of abused and neglected children in court in an effort to find each child a safe, permanent, nurturing home.

Civil Rights
12
Voices for Children Foundation Inc

To represent the best interests of children involved in civil proceedings due to abuse and/or neglect. court appointed special advocate associations support and promote court-appointed volunteer advocacy for abused and neglected children…

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mobile Loaves & Fishes Inc; the most unlike its peers is Lometa Volunteer Fire Departme. 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

10 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. 10 of the 17 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $33,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $27,300 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientWESTHOFF VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $10,800 · OtherWESTHOFF VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENTGOLDEN CRESCENT HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $10,000 · OtherGOLDEN CRESCENT HABITAT FOR HUMANITYCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF TRAVIS COUNTY: $9,461 · OtherCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF TRAVIS COUNTYTRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $8,800 · OtherTRINITY EPISCOPAL CHURCHMAKE-A-WISH TEXAS GULF COAST: $5,000 · OtherTRINITY EPISCOPAL SCHOOL: $5,000 · Other+1 more: $2,250 · OtherTHE VINE SCHOOL: $17,500 · EducationTHE VINE SCHOOLFRIENDS OF THE PORT O CONNOR LIBRARY INC: $6,500 · EducationFRIENDS OF THE …BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CUERO INC: $10,330 · Youth DevelopmentMOBILE LOAVES & FISHES INC: $5,550 · ReligionTEAM GLEASON FOUNDATION: $3,911 · Human ServicesAmerican Heart Association Inc: $2,000 · HealthLOMETA VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTME: $500 · Public Safety & Disaster
Other$126,611Education$24,000Youth Development$10,330Religion$5,550Human Services$3,911Health$2,000Public Safety & Disaster$500

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE VINE SCHOOL: $17,500 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetGOLDEN CRESCENT HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF TRAVIS COUNTY: $9,461 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMOBILE LOAVES & FISHES INC: $5,550 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHOPE OF SOUTH TEXAS INC: $2,250 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Wood Family Memorial …The Kathryn O'Connor …Amazonsmile Foundation
Wood Family Memorial TrustTX15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Wood Family Memorial Trust · The Kathryn O'Connor Foundation · 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 Georgia and William S Dubose Fnd funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Georgia and William S Dubose Fnd. 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%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report 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
    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 Georgia and William S Dubose Fnd?

    Find your warmest path to Georgia and William S Dubose Fnd 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 17 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Georgia and William S Dubose Fnd’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