Skip to content
Life Community Enrichment Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Life Community Enrichment Inc

The organization's mission is to promote charitable giving - "Enriching our communities, one life at a time".

$232k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$143k
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, FY2018 to 2025.

Food & Nutrition$202kHuman Services$155kPhilanthropy$64kAnimals$24kCivil Rights$12kHousing & Shelter$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$143,201
Median grant
1
States reached
$128k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INDIVIDUALS - LIST ATTACHED$143,201
Individual grant recipient$88,989
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 (FY19–21, $183k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 20% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Meals on Wheels Senior Servic: $6k → 5%Cumberland Presbyterian: $61k → 8%Wise County Committee on Agin: $6k → 8%Meals on Wheels Hood County: $6k → 10%Meals on Wheels North Central: $6k → 10%Network of Community Ministri: $12k → 14%Cumberland Presbyterian: $50k → 8%Good Samaritan - Garland TX: $12k → 14%Love Pacs - Plano: $11k → 5%Love Pacs - Plano: $8k → 5%Meals on Wheels Collin County: $6k → 5%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.
$1.5M · 10 repeat orgs$218k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +29% since the first grant, against +19% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
22

Total granted

$1.5M
$218k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+19%

Still filing today

40%
86%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesFood & NutritionCivil RightsHousing & ShelterHealthOther
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

  • CY
    CUMBERLAND YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES
    2× · 2019–2021 · $111k · revenue +29%
  • 5L
    5 LOAVES FOOD PANTRY
    2× · 2020–2021 · $22k · revenue +489%
  • L
    Lovepacs
    2× · 2020–2021 · $19k · revenue +20%

Funded once

  • MO
    Many Orgs-All LessThan 5000
    one grant, 2018 · $54k
  • MF
    Mater Filius of Dallas Inc
    one grant, 2019 · $16k · revenue -84%
  • CA
    COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF COLLIN COUNTY INC
    one grant, 2020 · $12k · revenue +8%
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
Meals On Wheels Ministry Inc

Empowers older and disabled adults to live independentlly in thier own homes by providing nutritious home-delivered meals, safety checks, socialization, and community connection, which result in an enhanced quality of life and purpose as…

Food & Nutrition
2
Meals On Wheels and More Inc

To nourish and enrich the lives of the homebound and other people in need through programs that promote dignity and independent living.

Food & Nutrition
3
Meals On Wheels

Prepare and deliver hot meals to the elderly and disabled 5 days a week.

Human Services
4
Meals On Wheels of Odessa Inc

Meals on Wheels of Odessa enables people to live with dignity by offering community support and sustenance through coordinated services and enable older adults to live in their own homes safely and independently as long as they are able.

—
5
Meals On Wheels of Coweta Inc

To prepare and deliver meals (meals on wheels) to homebound seniors in coweta county.

Human Services
6
Meals On Wheels Waco

Meals on wheels waco nourishes the bodies, minds, and spirits of older adults in the heart of texas through meals, transportation, activities, and volunteer support.

Human Services
7
Muleshoe Meals On Wheels Inc

The Muleshoe Meals on Wheels purpose is to engage in all activities necessary, useful, or expedient, through operative measures and active organizations, to promote and further the interests of the Senior citizens of the area. The purpose…

—
8
West Contra Costa County Meals On Wheels

Enable frail seniors to maintain their independence at home by providing them with high quality, nutritious meals that are cost effective, prepared in West Contra Costa County, delivered by caring drivers and administered by local…

Food & Nutrition
9
Dawson County Senior Citizens Center Inc

Provide meals on wheels, congregate meals, and recreational facility for elderly and low income persons of dawson county texas.

—
10
The Dalles Meals On Wheels Inc

To provide home-bound seniors and disabled people with a hot meal delivered to them and to provide seniors a place where seniors can go for a meal and also socially interact.

Food & Nutrition
11
Bread of Life Community Services
Food & Nutrition
12
Meals On Wheels of Somerset County Inc

Providing meals to the elderly and needy

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Meals On Wheels North Central Texas Inc; the most unlike its peers is Borderland Rainbow Center. 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

24 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. 24 of the 33 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)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
24/24
Grantees still filing
19/24
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individuals- List Attached: $646,946 · OtherIndividuals- List AttachedIndividual grant recipient: $602,453 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMany Orgs-All LessThan 5000: $54,092 · Other+10 more: $125,657 · Other+10 moreCUMBERLAND YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES: $110,830 · Human ServicesCUMBERLAND Y…Lovepacs: $18,531 · Human ServicesLovepacsGOOD SAMARITANS OF GARLAND INC: $12,000 · Human ServicesGOOD SAMARIT…NETWORK OF COMMUNITY MINISTRIES INC: $12,000 · Human ServicesNETWORK OF C…+5 more: $30,000 · Human Services+5 more5 LOAVES FOOD PANTRY: $21,606 · Food & NutritionKelly Center for Hunger Relief: $12,000 · Food & NutritionOUR DAILY BREAD INC: $9,000 · Food & NutritionMEALS ON WHEELS INC OF TARRANT COUNTY: $6,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD PANTRY OF JEFF DAVIS COUNTY INC: $6,000 · Food & NutritionEL PASOANS FIGHTING HUNGER: $6,000 · Food & NutritionCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF COLLIN COUNTY INC: $12,242 · Civil RightsBORDERLAND RAINBOW CENTER: $6,000 · Civil RightsCOMMUNITIES FOUNDATION OF TEXAS INC: $10,000 · PhilanthropyAGAPE RESOURCE & ASSISTANCE CENTER INC: $7,000 · Housing & ShelterVISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS: $6,000 · Health
Other$1,429,148Human Services$183,361Food & Nutrition$60,606Civil Rights$18,242Philanthropy$10,000Housing & Shelter$7,000Health$6,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCUMBERLAND YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES: $110,830 over 2y, 2.1% of budget5 LOAVES FOOD PANTRY: $21,606 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetALLEN COMMUNITY OUTREACH: $19,295 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetLovepacs: $18,531 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetMater Filius of Dallas Inc: $16,264 over 1y, 9.5% of budgetCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF COLLIN COUNTY INC: $12,242 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetKelly Center for Hunger Relief: $12,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetGOOD SAMARITANS OF GARLAND INC: $12,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetNETWORK OF COMMUNITY MINISTRIES INC: $12,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMUNITIES FOUNDATION OF TEXAS INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOUR DAILY BREAD INC: $9,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetAGAPE RESOURCE & ASSISTANCE CENTER INC: $7,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS SENIOR SERVICES: $6,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS INC OF TARRANT COUNTY: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetVISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION OF TEXAS: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOOD PANTRY OF JEFF DAVIS COUNTY INC: $6,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetHOOD COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING: $6,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetWISE COUNTY COMMITTEE ON AGING INC: $6,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetBORDERLAND RAINBOW CENTER: $6,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS COLLIN COUNTY: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMETROPORT MEALS ON WHEELS INC: $6,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetEL PASOANS FIGHTING HUNGER: $6,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLorton Community Action Center Inc: $5,110 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Communities Foundatio…Texas Instruments Fou…Coserv Charitable Fou…United Way of Metropo…Meals on Wheels Ameri…North Texas Food BankCelanese FoundationHillcrest FoundationReuter Family Foundat…The Florence Foundati…W P & Bulah Luse Foun…Carl C Anderson Sr an…
Communities Foundation of Texas IncTX30.9× affinity16 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Texas Instruments Foundation · Coserv Charitable Foundation · United Way of Metropolitan Dallas Inc · Meals on Wheels America · North Texas Food Bank · Celanese Foundation · Hillcrest Foundation · Reuter Family Foundation · The Florence Foundation · W P & Bulah Luse Foundation · Carl C Anderson Sr and Marie Jo Anderson Charitable 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 Life Community Enrichment Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Life Community Enrichment Inc. 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Life Community Enrichment Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Life Community Enrichment Inc 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 33 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 Life Community Enrichment’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