Skip to content

· Private foundation

Manrique de Lara Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$55k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$32k
Largest
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Education$51kArts & Culture$16kInternational$14kYouth Development$9kHuman Services$9kFood & Nutrition$8kReligion$5kPublic Benefit$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $42k
$3,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$355
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$31,500
LOVE BUILD HOPE FOUNDATIONS$10,000
Individual grant recipient$7,000
Individual grant recipient$3,500
CITY OF MCALLEN$1,500
Individual grant recipient$600
HOLY SPIRIT PARISH$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 (FY17–21, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 27%, against an area that typically sits at 19%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 19%GOOD SAMARITAN COMMUNITY SERVICES -: $2k → 23%HERMES MUSIC FOUNDATION: $14k → 27%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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$163k · 15 repeat orgs$42k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +86% since the first grant, against -2% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
18

Total granted

$163k
$31k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+86%
-2%

Still filing today

27%
39%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEnvironmentAnimalsCivil RightsCrime & LegalOther
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

  • BA
    Boys and Girls Club of McAllen Inc
    4× · 2019–2024 · $9k · revenue +103%
  • SA
    SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK
    2× · 2017–2018 · $5k · revenue +60%
  • CC
    CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY
    2× · 2018–2021 · $4k · revenue +86%

Funded once

  • HM
    HERMES MUSIC FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $14k · revenue -99% · 56% of their budget
  • MA
    MAKE A WISH
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
  • MP
    MCALLEN PERFORMING & CULTURAL ARTS
    one grant, 2024 · $3k
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
Guadalupe County Children's Advocacy Center

To advocate for and provide services to children and families when there are allegations of abuse and neglect throughout the investigation,prosecution, treatment, and prevention of child abuse, and to reduce the trauma to childrent with…

Crime & Legal
2
Tennis Officials of San Antonio Association
Recreation & Sports
3
Casa of South Texas Inc

Child Advocacy

Human Services
4
Border Missions

We distribute food, clothing, and toiletry items to the poor and needy along the TX-Mexico Border as well as ministering to their spiritual needs through services, health programs, and other humanitarian efforts.

Religion
5
Bluebonnet Childrens Center

To protect and enhance the quality of life for abused and neglected children in Medina, Real and Uvalde Counties of Texas.

Crime & Legal
6
San Antonio Automobile Dealers Association Foundation Inc
—
7
Helotes Humane Society

Rescue and place abandoned and unwanted pets. Provide low cost spay / neuter. Provide low-cost microchips. Provide community education.

Animals
8
Crime Stoppers of South Texas Inc
—
9
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Milam County
—
10
Healthy Families San Angelo

To enhance the ability of families to protect, nuture, and educate their children in the first five years of life and enable them to enter school ready to learn.

—
11
Chiquitas Friends

To rescue and provide food, shelter, and medical care for abandoned animals.

Animals
12
Sfdr San Felipe Dog Rescue Co Sunrunner - Pmb 1387

We are dedicated to the rescue and rehabilitation of unwanted, homeless, neglected, and abused dogs. Every dog should know what it feels like to be loved until the end of their lives.WHAT WE ARE .AND. ARE NOTThe San Felipe Dog Rescue is…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Good Samaritan Center of San Antonio; the most unlike its peers is Hermes Music Foundation. 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

11 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. 11 of the 36 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
6/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $46,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS: $25,000 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXASOUR LADY OF SORROWS SCHOOL: $20,200 · OtherOUR LADY OF SORROWS SCHOOLIndividual grant recipient: $17,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientFRIENDS FOR HOPE: $14,000 · OtherFRIENDS FOR HOPELOVE BUILD HOPE FOUNDATIONS: $10,000 · OtherBoys and Girls Club of McAllen Inc: $8,900 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $6,500 · Other+22 more: $39,500 · Other+22 moreHERMES MUSIC FOUNDATION: $13,585 · Human ServicesGOOD SAMARITAN CENTER OF SAN ANTONIO: $1,500 · Human ServicesCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF HIDALGO COUNT: $2,000 · Civil RightsFRIENDS OF QUINTA MAZATLAN INC: $400 · EnvironmentYaqui Animal Rescue: $250 · AnimalsEDINBURG CRIME STOPPERS INC: $150 · Crime & Legal
Other$187,600Human Services$15,085Civil Rights$2,000Environment$400Animals$250Crime & Legal$150

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHERMES MUSIC FOUNDATION: $13,585 over 1y, 56% of budgetBoys and Girls Club of McAllen Inc: $8,900 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetSAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY: $4,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF HIDALGO COUNT: $2,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetGOOD SAMARITAN CENTER OF SAN ANTONIO: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTEXAS AMATEUR ATHLETIC FEDERATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEDINBURG CRIME STOPPERS INC: $150 over 1y, 1.4% 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.

  • Who funds HERMES MUSIC FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Boys and Girls Club of McAllen Inc ↗
  • Who funds SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds FOOD BANK OF RIO GRANDE VALLEY INC ↗
  • Who funds COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF HIDALGO COUNT ↗
  • Who funds GOOD SAMARITAN CENTER OF SAN ANTONIO ↗
  • Who funds TEXAS AMATEUR ATHLETIC FEDERATION ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF QUINTA MAZATLAN INC ↗
  • Who funds Yaqui Animal Rescue ↗
  • Who funds EDINBURG CRIME STOPPERS INC ↗

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.

Raul Tijerina Jr FoundationTX13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Raul Tijerina Jr Foundation · Valley Baptist Legacy Foundation · The John G and Marie Stella Kenedy Memorial Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Manrique de Lara Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Manrique de Lara Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s 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
    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.

    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 36 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 Manrique de Lara’s filings →

    More from the funding graph