· Private foundation
Hector and Gloria Lopez Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $6k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $13k
- $250k+6 grants · $11M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| St Mary's University of San Antonio | $2,525,010 |
| University of Incarnate Word | $2,477,933 |
| Our Lady of the Lake University | $2,235,266 |
| Univeristy of Texas Foundation | $1,685,251 |
| Texas A&M - Corpus Christi Foundation | $1,645,809 |
| Excelencia in Education | $250,000 |
| Excelencia in Education | $12,500 |
| Con Mi MADRE | $5,000 |
| Southern Brooks Volunteer Fire Department | $500 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY22–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 51% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 +44% since the first grant, against +2% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 16% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9.2M went to new ones.
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
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INC3× · 2022–2024 · $6.4M · revenue +44%- UOUniversity of Texas2× · 2022–2023 · $10k
- SBSouthern Brooks Volunteer Fire Departmen3× · 2022–2024 · $4k · revenue +13%
Funded once
- SESt Edwards Universityone grant, 2023 · $2.1M · revenue +2%
- TSTEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $1.8M · revenue +257% · 34% of their budget
- TATexas A&M San Antonio Foundationone grant, 2022 · $1.7M · revenue -68% · 34% of their budget
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.
To support the university of texas system
To support the university of texas system
To ensure that the student body experiences balanced intellectual, psychological, social and spiritual development, aimed at enabling them to become active productive members of society where they live and work.
Operated exclusively for educational purposes specifically including to further educational activities at texas a& m university-central texas within the meaning of 501(c)(3).
The forty first foundation supports and advances the university of texas at austin in its pursuit of excellence. we work closely with the office of the president to identify, fund, and implement strategic initiatives that enhance the…
To facilitate research and development within the texas a&m university system and selected other entities.
The purpose of the university research foundation is to promote texas state university's objectives of providing higher education, conducting research, providing public service, and assisting in economic development in texas.
Public charitable uses and purposes for the benefit of the texas state university system and its components by providing, directly or indirectly, assistance and benefits to the system and/ or the systems components.
To complement the state of texas' support of the colleges by providing financial support for new and ongoing projects and activities in the areas of research, education and community service.
The Alabama A&M University Foundation was established to receive, hold, invest, manage, use, and administer property of all kinds, whether given absolutely or in trust, for the benefit of Alabama A&M University and its educational,…
Making education accessible for students through philanthropic support, aligned with Austin Community College (ACC) strategic priorities.
The foundation supports west texas a&m university, an institution of higher education, and the students of wtamu by receiving and administering gifts from the public.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The University of Texas Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Southern Brooks Volunteer Fire Departmen. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 15 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 THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds St Mary's University ↗
- Who funds University of the Incarnate Word ↗
- Who funds OUR LADY OF THE LAKE UNIVERSITY OF SAN ANTONIO ↗
- Who funds St Edwards University ↗
- Who funds TEXAS STATE UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Texas A&M San Antonio Foundation ↗
- Who funds TEXAS A&M-CORPUS CHRISTI FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Texas A&M University - Kingsville Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds AUSTIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds TEXAS HIGHER EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds EXCELENCIA IN EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds Con Mi MADRE ↗
- Who funds Southern Brooks Volunteer Fire Departmen ↗
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: Greater Texas Foundation · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Hector and Gloria Lopez 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 Hector and Gloria Lopez Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Hector and Gloria Lopez 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.