Skip to content
Health Foundation of East Texas at a glance

· Private foundation

Health Foundation of East Texas

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.

$7.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$7.5M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Health$28MEducation$5.9MHuman Services$988kRecreation & Sports$50kYouth Development$50kPublic Benefit$10kPhilanthropy$500
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $9k
  • $250k+1 grant · $7.5M
$6,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$186M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE$7,500,000
MOSAIC COUNSELING CENTER$6,000
TYLER AREA BUSINESS EDUCATION COUNC$2,500
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 (FY21–23, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%1 IN 3 FOUNDATION: $18k → 12%FOSTERING COLLECTIVE: $15 → 12%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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$31M · 5 repeat orgs$4.7M to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
12

Total granted

$31M
$4.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
+33%

Still filing today

60%
58%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthEducationHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentPublic BenefitPhilanthropyOther
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

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE
    6× · 2020–2025 · $29M
  • NS
    NEXT STEP COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS
    4× · 2021–2024 · $970k · revenue +18%
  • ET
    EAST TEXAS COMMUNITY CLINIC INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $517k · revenue +87%

Funded once

  • HC
    HOUSTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT
    one grant, 2019 · $4.0M
  • TS
    TEXAS SCOTTISH RITE HOSPITAL FOR CRIPPLED CHILDRENgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $256k · revenue +45%
  • SC
    SAMARITAN COUNSELING CENTER
    one grant, 2021 · $96k
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
Center for Public Policy Priorities

At the Every Texan, we believe in a Texas that offers everyone the chance to compete and succeed in life. We envision a Texas where everyone is healthy, well educated, and financially secure. We want the best Texas, a proud state that sets…

Public Benefit
2
Texas Clean Energy Coalition
—
3
Texprotects-the Texas Association for the Protection of Children

TexProtects advances public policy and local implementation to strenghten families to prevent child abuse and neglect.

Youth Development
4
Texans Care for Children Inc

Texans Care for Children shapes public policies and brings Texans together to make children a statewide priority. We work so kids can have what they need to be healthy, secure, and thriving and so every Texan can have the best start to…

Crime & Legal
5
Your Health Clinic

Empowering north texans to optimize health through outreach, education, prevention, evidence-based interventions, integration, and quality measurement.

—
6
Progress Texas Institute

The Progress Texas Institute provides research and strategic communications on issues with the ultimate goal of increasing civic engagement.

Civil Rights
7
Texas Government Accountability Foundation Inc

To foster transparency and uphold ethical standards across all levels of government in texas and empower citizens to hold their government accountable.

Public Benefit
8
Texas Community Counseling

When care is within reach, lives change. Texas Community Counseling is a faith-based nonprofit committed to bringing hope and healing through mental health care to the communities that need it the most. We empower individuals to heal,…

Human Services
9
Communities in Schools of Central Texas

Communities in schools of central texas (cisct) ensures students have holistic support, removing academic and nonacademic barriers to their success in school.

Education
10
Child Care Associates

Cca's mission is to assist family successes through excellence in comprehensive early education and development services.

—
11
Texans for Parental Choice in Education

Advocate for the constitutionally protected freedom to choose where and how their children are educated and to further the common good and general welfare by empowering Texan families with the legal right to choose the best school for…

—
12
UNITEDC3 Inc

To provide christian professionals and organizations a platform to network, connect and grow, personally and professionally, to serve their communities and fulfill their calling.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mentoring Alliance; the most unlike its peers is Next Step Community Solutions. 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 18 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
8/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCE: $28,859,817 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HEALTH SCIENCEHOUSTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT: $3,988,924 · OtherHOUSTON COUNTY HOSPITAL DISTRICT+7 more: $843,905 · OtherNEXT STEP COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS: $969,991 · HealthTEXAS SCOTTISH RITE HOSPITAL FOR CRIPPLED CHILDREN: $255,586 · HealthEAST TEXAS BAPTIST UNIVERSITY: $200,000 · EducationSMITH COUNTY CHAMPIONS FOR CHILDREN INC: $30,000 · EducationMENTORING ALLIANCE: $50,000 · Youth Development1 IN 3 FOUNDATION: $17,500 · Human Services+1 more: $15 · Human ServicesTexas 2036: $10,000 · Public BenefitTHE CENTER FOR EFFECTIVE PHILANTHROPY INC: $500 · Philanthropy
Other$33,692,646Health$1,225,577Education$230,000Youth Development$50,000Human Services$17,515Public Benefit$10,000Philanthropy$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 budgetNEXT STEP COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS: $969,991 over 4y, 11% of budgetEAST TEXAS COMMUNITY CLINIC INC: $516,667 over 4y, 12% of budgetTEXAS SCOTTISH RITE HOSPITAL FOR CRIPPLED CHILDREN: $255,586 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEAST TEXAS BAPTIST UNIVERSITY: $200,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMENTORING ALLIANCE: $50,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetSMITH COUNTY CHAMPIONS FOR CHILDREN INC: $30,000 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetTexas 2036: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR EFFECTIVE PHILANTHROPY INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEAST TEXAS ORPHAN CARE NETWORK INC DBA THE FOSTERING COLLECTIVE: $15 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.

Etx Successor SystemAmazonsmile Foundation
Etx Successor SystemTX13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Etx Successor System · 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 Health Foundation of East Texas funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Health Foundation of East Texas. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • The Center for Effective Philanthropy Inc: 0% of 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 · 0–15%
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 Health Foundation of East Texas?

Find your warmest path to Health Foundation of East Texas 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 18 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 Health Foundation of East Texas’ 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