Skip to content
Mansfield Cares Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Mansfield Cares Inc

To help misd needy families.

$150k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$67k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2025.

Food & Nutrition$706kEducation$144kHealth$98k
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 8 grants below total $137,401, the rows itemized in this filing. The $150,083 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $12,682 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $45k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $67k
$7,406
Median grant
1
States reached
$403k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COMMON GROUND NETWORK INC$67,497
MANSFIELD INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT$24,500
BETHLEHEM BAPTIST CHURCH OF TEXAS$9,922
REDEEMED CHRISTIAN CHURCH LIGHTHOUSE FOR THE NATIONS$7,406
MANSFIELD MISSION CENTER INC$7,406
TRINITY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH$6,930
HARVESTING INTERNATIONAL MINISTRY CENTER INC$6,902
RUSH CREEK BAPTIST CHURCH$6,838
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 (FY17–25, $563k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%COMMON GROUND: $97k → 11%COMMON GROUND: $73k → 11%COMMON GROUND NETWORK INC: $67k → 11%COMMON GROUND NETWORK INC: $66k → 11%COMMON GROUND: $62k → 11%COMMON GROUND: $53k → 11%COMMON GROUND: $37k → 11%COMMON GROUND: $33k → 11%COMMON GROUND: $32k → 11%COMMON GROUND ANGEL TREE: $25k → 11%SOCIETY OF SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL FORT WORTH DIOCESAN COUNCIL: $8k → 11%ST JUDE CONFERENCE FOOD PANTRY: $8k → 11%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$947k · 11 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
0

Total granted

$947k
$0

Still filing today

45%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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 ServicesReligionFood & NutritionPhilanthropyOther
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

  • CG
    COMMON GROUND NETWORK INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $547k · revenue +55% · 43% of their budget
  • TS
    THE SOCIETY OF SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL FORT WORTH DIOCESAN COUNCIL
    2× · 2023–2024 · $16k · revenue +34%
  • MI
    MANSFIELD ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION
    2× · 2023–2024 · $14k · revenue +3%

Funded once

    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
    04the grantee network

    6 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. 6 of the 11 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.

    2
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    2
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    5/6
    Grantees still filing
    4/6
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    COMMON GROUND NETWORK INC: $547,005 · Human ServicesCOMMON GROUND NETWORK INC+1 more: $15,543 · Human ServicesMANSFIELD ISD: $130,800 · OtherMANSFIELD ISDMANSFIELD CARING PLACE: $50,000 · OtherMANSFIELD CARING PLACEBETHLEHEM BAPTIST CHURCH OF MANSFIELD TEXAS: $25,465 · OtherBETHLEHEM BAPTIST CHURCH OF MANS…RUSH CREEK BAPTIST CHURCH: $23,647 · OtherRUSH CREEK BAPTIST CHURCHREDEEMED CHRISTIAN CHURCHLIGHTHOUSE FOR THE NATIONS: $21,575 · OtherREDEEMED CHRISTIAN CHURCHLIGHTHO…TRINITY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH: $21,099 · OtherTRINITY PRESBYTERIAN CHURCHMANSFIELD MISSON CENTER INC: $54,981 · ReligionHIM Food Bank Inc: $43,823 · Food & NutritionMANSFIELD ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $13,500 · Philanthropy
    Human Services$562,548Other$272,586Religion$54,981Food & Nutrition$43,823Philanthropy$13,500

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

    25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOMMON GROUND NETWORK INC: $547,005 over 9y, 43% of budgetMANSFIELD MISSON CENTER INC: $54,981 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetMANSFIELD CARING PLACE: $50,000 over 2y, 39% of budgetHIM Food Bank Inc: $43,823 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetTHE SOCIETY OF SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL FORT WORTH DIOCESAN COUNCIL: $15,543 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetMANSFIELD ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $13,500 over 2y, 2.0% 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 COMMON GROUND NETWORK INC ↗
    • Who funds MANSFIELD MISSON CENTER INC ↗
    • Who funds MANSFIELD CARING PLACE ↗
    • Who funds HIM Food Bank Inc ↗
    • Who funds THE SOCIETY OF SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL FORT WORTH DIOCESAN COUNCIL ↗
    • Who funds MANSFIELD ISD EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗

    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 Health Hospital…Community Foundation …Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
    Communities Foundation of Texas IncTX14.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Texas Health Hospital Mansfield · Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · 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 Mansfield Cares Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mansfield Cares Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%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
      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.

      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 11 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 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 Mansfield Cares’ 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