Skip to content
Lubbock Osteopathic Fund Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Lubbock Osteopathic Fund Inc

Its FY2020 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$81k
Granted FY2020
4
Grants FY2020
1
States reached
$65k
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, FY2017 to 2020.

Education$79kHealth$36kHuman Services$35kArts & Culture$30kReligion$23kFood & Nutrition$21kCrime & Legal$17kScience & Tech$11k
02FY2020 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2020

  • Under $10k2 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $65k
$10,160
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION$64,716
LUBBOCK MEALS ON WHEELS$10,160
GUADALUPE PARKWAY CENTER$5,000
SALVATION ARMY$1,000
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 (FY18–19, $11k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%INSIDE OUT FOUNDATION: $6k → 17%INSIDE OUT FOUNDATION: $5k → 17%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.

17%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$42k · 3 repeat orgs$208k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +143% since the first grant, against +45% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2020, 1 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
13

Total granted

$42k
$142k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+143%
+45%

Still filing today

67%
62%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 19% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $66k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20
Human ServicesEducationFood & NutritionCivil RightsArts & CultureHealthOther
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

  • LM
    LUBBOCK MEALS ON WHEELS INC
    2× · 2018–2020 · $21k · revenue +28%
  • IO
    INSIDE OUT FOUNDATION
    2× · 2018–2019 · $11k · revenue +143%
  • GP
    GUADALUPE PARKWAY CENTER
    2× · 2019–2020 · $10k

Funded once

  • TG
    TEXAS GIRLS AND BOYS RANCHgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $23k · revenue +91%
  • LE
    LUBBOCK ENTERTAIN PERFORMING ARTS
    one grant, 2017 · $20k
  • AA
    Alstrom Angelsgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $18k · revenue +145%
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
Children's Home of Lubbock and Family Service Agency Inc

Working in creative collaboration to provide quality care that transforms the lives of at-risk children and their families through the active compassion of christ.

Human Services
2
Lubbock Family Outreach Center Inc Dba Family Guidance & Outreach Center

The Family Guidance & Outreach Center of Lubbock is dedicated to the prevention of child abuse and neglect and supporting, mentoring, and educating parents.

Human Services
3
The Lullaby House

The Lullaby House missionis ot strengthen families by providing programs and services to teenage parents and familites in need which will inspire and promote generational change.

Youth Development
4
Ywca of Lubbock Legacy Fund Inc

The ywca of lubbock legacy fund inc. is dedicated to meeting the needs of the ywca of lubbock in supporting the community through its mission of eliminating racism, empowering women, and promoting peace, justice, freedom, and dignity for…

Philanthropy
5
Lone Star Casa Inc

Lone Star CASA elevates the voices of children in Kaufman and Rockwall County who have experienced abuse and neglect by providing trained volunteer advocates to work alongside children and families so they can achieve safety and stability…

Civil Rights
6
Family Legal Services of the South Plains

The family legal services of the south plains works to provide low income clients of the south plains with first-rate legal assistance, advocacy, and quality counsel in matters of family and elder law at free and/or reduced cost.

Crime & Legal
7
Lubbock Christian University Foundation

Raising funds to support the activities of lubbock christian university and to fund capital projects for instructional facilities for lubbock christian university.

Education
8
Womens Sober House of Lufkin Inc

The Mantooth House is a Recovery Residence for Chemically Dependent adult women who have successfully completed primary treatment and are in early, but active recovery. We exist to provide quality recovery housing and bridge the gap…

Health
9
Lubbock Christian School

Lubbock christian school is dedicated to providing a quality environment in which each student will grow in wisdom and stature and in favor with god and man. lcs strives for excellence spiritually, personally, and professionally among…

Education
10
Lubbock Chamber of Commerce Foundation
—
11
Junior League of Lubbock Foundation

The foundation was established to provide a permanent endowment fund or funds for the purpose of encouraging members of the public to make gifts to the junior league of lubbock, inc. and for providing a more secure and permanent means of…

Community Improvement
12
Big Brothers Big Sisters of Lubbock Inc

To create and support one-to-one mentoring relationships that ignite the power and promise of youth.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Texas Girls and Boys Ranch; the most unlike its peers is Sondras Song. 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

12 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. 12 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
11/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LUBBOCK ENTERTAIN PERFORMING ARTS: $20,000 · OtherLUBBOCK ENTERTAIN PERFORMING ARTSCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATE: $15,024 · OtherCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATELUBBOCK CHILDRENS HEALTH CLINIC: $14,000 · OtherLUBBOCK CHILDRENS HEALTH CLINICSOUTH PLAINS COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $13,000 · OtherSOUTH PLAINS COLLEGE FOUNDATIONU(BIQUITOUS) LABS: $10,985 · OtherU(BIQUITOUS) LABSGUADALUPE PARKWAY CENTER: $9,996 · OtherGUADALUPE PARKWAY CENTERSONDRAS SONG: $6,482 · OtherSONDRAS SONGVOICE OF HOPE: $3,494 · Other+2 more: $2,000 · OtherTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC: $64,716 · EducationTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INCTEXAS GIRLS AND BOYS RANCH: $22,500 · Human ServicesTEXAS GIRLS AND B…INSIDE OUT FOUNDATION: $11,419 · Human ServicesINSIDE OUT FOUNDA…WOMEN'S PROTECTIVE SERVICES: $5,750 · Human ServicesWOMEN'S PROTECTIV…LUBBOCK MEALS ON WHEELS INC: $20,857 · Food & NutritionLUBBOCK M…Alstrom Angels: $18,430 · HealthTHE LOUISE HOPKINS UNDERWOOD CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $10,000 · Arts & CultureCASA OF GRAYSON COUNTY INC: $1,666 · Civil Rights
Other$94,981Education$64,716Human Services$39,669Food & Nutrition$20,857Health$18,430Arts & Culture$10,000Civil Rights$1,666

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 budgetTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC: $64,716 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTEXAS GIRLS AND BOYS RANCH: $22,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetLUBBOCK MEALS ON WHEELS INC: $20,857 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetAlstrom Angels: $18,430 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetLUBBOCK CHILDRENS HEALTH CLINIC: $14,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSOUTH PLAINS COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $13,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetINSIDE OUT FOUNDATION: $11,419 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetTHE LOUISE HOPKINS UNDERWOOD CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetWOMEN'S PROTECTIVE SERVICES: $5,750 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE OPPORTUNITY PLAN INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Ch Foundation IncDiekemper Family Foun…Community Foundation …Texas Instruments Fou…South Plains Foundati…The Evelyn M Davies F…Ershel Franklin Chari…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Ch Foundation IncTX22.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ch Foundation Inc · Diekemper Family Foundation Inc · Community Foundation of West Texas · Texas Instruments Foundation · South Plains Foundation · The Evelyn M Davies Foundation Trust · Ershel Franklin Charitable Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Lubbock Osteopathic Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lubbock Osteopathic Fund 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
    3report 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 Lubbock Osteopathic Fund Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Lubbock Osteopathic Fund 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 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Lubbock Osteopathic’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