· Private foundation
Knapp Community Care Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $5k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $191k
- $50k–250k13 grants · $913k
- $250k+1 grant · $600k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EL MILAGRO CLINIC | $600,000 |
| COMMUNITY HOPE PROJECTSHOPE FAMILY HEALTH CENTER | $140,000 |
| VALLEY NATURE CENTER | $100,000 |
| VALLEY INITIATIVE FOR DEVELOPMENT AND ADVANCEMENT (VIDA) | $100,000 |
| AURORA HOUSE FOUNDATION | $87,035 |
| SOUTH TEXAS JUVENILE DIABETES ASSOCIATION | $63,245 |
| SU CASA DE ESPARANZA INC | $60,000 |
| CHILDREN'S BEREAVEMENT CENTER OF THE RGV | $58,000 |
| DENTIST WHO CARE | $55,000 |
| THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF WESLACO INC | $50,000 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF EDINBURG RGV | $50,000 |
| OPEN HANDS COMMUNITY CHARITABLE SERVICES | $50,000 |
| CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF THE HILDAGO CO | $50,000 |
| ACCESS ESPERANZA CLINICS INC | $50,000 |
| BUCKNER CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES | $30,000 |
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 (FY18–24, $1.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 21%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 64% 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 +35% since the first grant, against +26% for the ones you funded once.
27 repeat relationships — 14 still active in FY2024, 13 since wound down; 11 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, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $314k 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
- LRLower Rio Grande Valley Community Health Management6× · 2018–2024 · $1.1M · revenue +91%
- AEACCESS ESPERANZA CLINICS INC6× · 2018–2024 · $597k · revenue +59%
- STSOUTH TEXAS JUVENILE DIABETES ASSOCIATION7× · 2018–2024 · $440k · revenue +269% · 33% of their budget
Funded once
- MMMEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE FOR TEXASgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $159k · revenue +418%
- COCITY OF WESLACOone grant, 2018 · $125k
- TATexas A&M Foundationgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $100k · revenue +116%
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.
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 care services are provided to low to moderate income families who are residents of South Texas. Services are provided at a low cost are based on abiilty to pay base. Approximately 18,022 patients were served in the fiscal year.
Women's Health and Family Planning Association of Texas ("WHFPT") is dedicated to the belief that all Texans deserve the right to determine the number, timing, and spacing of their children through access to affordable, confidential,…
Pregnancy counseling
South Texas Rural Health Services, Inc. provides charitable health services, including the recruitment of health care personnel to the rural service area, and primarily serves the low income population.
Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Family Planning and Preventative Health provides comprehensive and complementary health care services in settings that preserve and protect the essential privacy and rights of the individual, advocates…
To provide primary health and dental care to the underserved of fayette and lee counties, texas.
To deliver the highest value patient experience through quality, safety, accessibility, and cost-effectiveness, enhanced by medical education and research in collaboration with Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH).
Vida Y Salud-Health Systems, Inc. was founded in 1972 and provides health services to the people of Zavala,Dimmit,LaSalle,Uvalde and surrounding counties. The clinic maintains four program/service delivery sites and provides services such…
Crisis pregnancy counseling.
Provide family planning and reproductive healthcare services to both adults and teenagers, with particular emphasis on serving low-income and medically underserved populations.
Our mission is to provide Accessible and Affordable Holistic-Based mental-health care to the communities we serve without without regard to their background or insurance status in a caring environment.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is It's Time Texas Inc and the most unlike its peers is Aurora House Foundation. 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) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 17% 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.
27 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. 27 of the 46 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 KNAPP MEDICAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds Lower Rio Grande Valley Community Health Management ↗
- Who funds ACCESS ESPERANZA CLINICS INC ↗
- Who funds DENTISTS WHO CARE INC ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK OF RIO GRANDE VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTH TEXAS JUVENILE DIABETES ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds HOLY FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds IT'S TIME TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds Su Casa De Esperanza Inc ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HOPE PROJECTS INC ↗
- Who funds IDEA Public Schools ↗
- Who funds TEAM MARIO ↗
- Who funds MEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE FOR TEXAS ↗
- Who funds AURORA HOUSE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF WESLACO ↗
- Who funds Texas A&M Foundation ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS OF TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds Prevent Blindness Texas ↗
- Who funds OPEN HANDS COMMUNITY CHARITABLE SERVICES ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF BROWNSVILLE DBA COME DREAM COME BUILD ↗
- Who funds TIP of Texas Family Outreach Inc ↗
- Who funds Affordable Homes of South Texas Inc ↗
- Who funds BUCKNER CHILDREN & FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds Planned Parenthood South Texas ↗
- Who funds Rio Grande Valley Diabetes Assoc ↗
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: Valley Baptist Legacy Foundation · Raul Tijerina Jr Foundation · Methodist Healthcare Ministries of South Texas Inc · Meadows Foundation Inc · The John G and Marie Stella Kenedy Memorial Foundation · The Brown Foundation Inc · Texas Mutual Insurance Company · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable 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 Knapp Community Care 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.