Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersAlso receives grants — funding profile →
Plinth

· Public charity

Harrington Cancer and Health Foundation

To reduce the burden of cancer and to promote and serve the healthcare needs of residents living in amarillo and surrounding communities.

$2.4M
Granted FY2024still arriving
24
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$188k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
0173% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.

Education$2.4MHealth$2.3MPhilanthropy$469kHuman Services$123kRecreation & Sports$100kArts & Culture$26kReligion$19kHousing & Shelter$6kOther$2.0M
02FY2024 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 24 grants below total $903,157 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,372,097 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $1,468,940 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $57k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $208k
  • $50k–250k8 grants · $638k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$68M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WTAMU FOUNDATION$187,500
NORTHWEST TEXAS HOSPITAL$120,000
MEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTIT$80,000
OGH HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION$50,000
OGH HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION$50,000
THE BRIDGE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CTR$50,000
TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC$50,000
TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC$50,000
TURN CENTER$39,955
MOORE OPTIONS PREGANCY CENTER$33,114
MOORE COUNTY HEALTH FOUNDATION$25,000
HOPE AND HEALING PLACE$25,000
BSA HEALTH SYSTEM$22,575
BSA HEALTH SYSTEM$22,575
DIABETES FOUNDATION OF THE HIGH PLA$15,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY21–24, $123k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES: $55k → 20%FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES: $10k → 20%FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES: $9k → 20%THE BRIDGE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CTR: $50k → 20%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$6.2M · 21 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +3% since the first grant, against -4% for the ones you funded once.

21 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
21

Total granted

$6.2M
$886k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+3%
-4%

Still filing today

67%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $297k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthEducationHuman ServicesPhilanthropyArts & CultureReligionOther

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

  • HT
    HEAL THE CITY FREE CLINIC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $1.2M · revenue +51%
  • MC
    MOORE COUNTY HEALTH FOUNDATION
    5× · 2018–2024 · $449k · revenue +3% · 54% of their budget
  • DW
    DOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER INC
    6× · 2018–2024 · $132k · revenue +21%

Funded once

  • TA
    THE AMARILLO COLLEGE FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $250k · revenue -63%
  • OB
    Oklahoma Blood Institutegraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue +44%
  • KI
    KIDS INC OF AMARILLO
    one grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue -64%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Aaf Community Health Foundation

Support organization of amarillo area foundation, inc. to provide and support medical and health care facilities, services, and education in amarillo, texas, and the texas panhandle area.

Health
2
North Central Texas Medical Foundation
Health
3
Medical Center League House of Amarillo Texas Inc

To serve as a home away from home for patients and their families coming to amarillo, texas for health care treatment.

Health
4
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
5
Texas Health Harris Methodist Hospital Fort Worth

A faith-based organization whose mission is to improve the health of the people in the communities it serves regardless of their ability to pay.

Health
6
Texas Trust Gives
Philanthropy
7
Comanche County Memorial Hospital Foundation Inc

The mission of the comanche county memorial hospital foundation is to coordinate and encourage financial gifts and community involvement to support the mission of comanche county memorial hospital.

—
8
Tejas Health Care

To provide primary health and dental care to the underserved of fayette and lee counties, texas.

Health
9
Big Horn County Memorial Hospital Auxiliary
Health
10
University of North Texas Health Science Center At Ft Worth Health Systems

To improve the health and quality of life for the people of texas and beyond through excellence in education, research, clinical care, community engagement and to provide national leadership in primary care.

Health
11
Hendrick Home for Children
—
12
Healthy Family Services of Texas Inc

Healthy Family Services of Texas is dedicated to promoting the physical, mental, and emotional health of our patients by offering comprehensive healthcare services and wellness programs.

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Amarillo Area Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Children's Heart Lane. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyVulnerable Population Suppo…Child and Family Support Se…Agricultural Industry Assoc…Faith-Based Community Assis…Faith-Based Community Assis…
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 23 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%0%<5yr13%10%5–10yr18%35%10–20yr13%10%20–35yr12%24%35–55yr21%21%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%0%<5yr13%3%5–10yr18%50%10–20yr13%5%20–35yr12%14%35–55yr21%28%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/48
the rest of the field
9%
112/1,289

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.

04the grantee network

35 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. 35 of the 48 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
34/35
Grantees still filing
18/35
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC — $1,718,203 · EducationTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INCWEST TEXAS A&M UNIV FOUNDATION — $629,375 · EducationWEST TEXAS A&M UNIV FOUNDATION+2 more — $17,536 · EducationHEAL THE CITY FREE CLINIC — $1,169,901 · HealthHEAL THE CITY FREE CLINICTURN CENTER — $251,074 · HealthTURN CENTERRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF AMARILLO — $150,000 · HealthRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF…COALITION OF HEALTH SERVICES INC — $118,000 · HealthOGH HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION — $100,000 · HealthOklahoma Blood Institute — $100,000 · HealthDALLAM-HARTLEY COUNTIES HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION — $88,000 · HealthMEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE FOR TEXAS — $80,000 · Health+7 more — $212,652 · Health+7 moreNorthwest Hills Surgical Hosp — $338,128 · OtherNorthwest Hills Surgical HospOCHILTREE HOSPITAL DISTRICT — $313,544 · OtherOCHILTREE HOSPITAL DISTRICTAMARILLO RECOVERY FROM ALCOHOL AND DRUGS INC — $300,000 · OtherAMARILLO RECOVERY FROM ALCOHOL …BSA HOSPITAL — $276,975 · OtherBSA HOSPITALTHE AMARILLO COLLEGE FOUNDATION — $250,000 · OtherTHE AMARILLO COLLEGE FOUNDATIONDOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER INC — $131,500 · OtherDOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER INCCENIKOR FOUNDATION — $100,000 · Other+14 more — $325,548 · Other+14 moreMOORE COUNTY HEALTH FOUNDATION — $449,477 · Philanthropy+2 more — $20,000 · PhilanthropyFAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES OF AMARILLO — $73,000 · Human ServicesTHE BRIDGE — $50,000 · Human ServicesKIDS INC OF AMARILLO — $100,000 · Recreation & SportsTEXAS PANHANDLE WAR MEMORIAL FOUNDATION INC — $16,167 · Arts & CultureTHE CHILDREN'S HEART LANE — $10,000 · Arts & Culture
Education$2,365,114Health$2,269,627Other$2,035,695Philanthropy$469,477Human Services$123,000Recreation & Sports$100,000Arts & Culture$26,167

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC — $1,718,203 over 8y, 0.8% of budgetHEAL THE CITY FREE CLINIC — $1,169,901 over 7y, 15% of budgetWEST TEXAS A&M UNIV FOUNDATION — $629,375 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetMOORE COUNTY HEALTH FOUNDATION — $449,477 over 5y, 54% of budgetAMARILLO RECOVERY FROM ALCOHOL AND DRUGS INC — $300,000 over 2y, 15% of budgetTURN CENTER — $251,074 over 6y, 1.5% of budgetTHE AMARILLO COLLEGE FOUNDATION — $250,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF AMARILLO — $150,000 over 2y, 6.0% of budgetDOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER INC — $131,500 over 6y, 1.6% of budgetCOALITION OF HEALTH SERVICES INC — $118,000 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetOGH HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 1y, 46% of budgetOklahoma Blood Institute — $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKIDS INC OF AMARILLO — $100,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetCENIKOR FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetDALLAM-HARTLEY COUNTIES HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION — $88,000 over 1y, 40% of budgetMEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE FOR TEXAS — $80,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES OF AMARILLO — $73,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetDIABETES FOUNDATION OF THE HIGH PLAINS — $70,000 over 5y, 3.1% of budgetTHE BRIDGE — $50,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetCAMP ALPHIE — $46,500 over 3y, 66% of budgetTHE HOPE AND HEALING PLACE INC — $34,058 over 1y, 7.6% of budgetDUMAS AREA CRISIS PREGNANCY CENTER — $33,114 over 1y, 4.6% of budgetPANHANDLE BREAST HEALTH — $32,274 over 3y, 18% of budgetHOPE CHOICE INC — $29,200 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetSHARING HOPE MINISTRY INC — $18,500 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetTEXAS PANHANDLE WAR MEMORIAL FOUNDATION INC — $16,167 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S HEART LANE — $10,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetAMARILLO AREA FOUNDATION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTEXAS DENTAL ASSOCIATION SMILES FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetHOPE TO OPPORTUNITIES FOUNDATION — $10,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetAMARILLO ISD FOUNDATION — $7,536 over 1y, 16% of budgetSwisher Memorial Healthcare System — $7,006 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFAMILY CARE FOUNDATION — $7,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetMARTHA'S HOME INC — $6,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetTHE UNITED WAY INC — $5,400 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

Amarillo Area Foundat…Mary E Bivins Foundat…High Plains Christian…The Don & Sybil Harri…Josephine Anderson Ch…Mays FoundationDr Kent Roberts & Ile…Aaf Community Health …Xcel Energy FoundationAmarillo Business Fou…The United Way IncBruckner Family Found…
Amarillo Area Foundation IncTX68.3× affinity31 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amarillo Area Foundation Inc · Mary E Bivins Foundation · High Plains Christian Ministries Foundation · The Don & Sybil Harrington Foundation · Josephine Anderson Charitable Trust · Mays Foundation · Dr Kent Roberts & Ilene Roberts Balliett Foundation · Aaf Community Health Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · Amarillo Business Foundation · The United Way Inc · Bruckner Family Foundation Inc

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 Harrington Cancer and Health 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%your share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Oklahoma Blood Institute — 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
typical government reliance, FY20–25

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 48 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

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 camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines