Skip to content
Mission Capital at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Mission Capital

The organization's vision is a central texas where all have access to opportunity and can thrive.

$61k
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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 2024.

Health$116kEducation$82kCommunity Improvement$60kYouth Development$43kPhilanthropy$20kHousing & Shelter$20kHuman Services$20k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $60,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $61,250 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,250 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.
$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ALLIANCE FOR AFRICAN AMERICAN HEALTH IN CENTRAL TEXAS$20,000
ENDING COMMUNITY HOMELESSNESS COALITION (ECHO)$20,000
JEREMIAH PROGRAM$20,000
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 (FY24–24, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%ENDING COMMUNITY HOMELESSNESS COALITION (ECHO): $20k → 10%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 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
Leadership Austin

Leadership austin connects and develops leaders to courageously engage and transform our communities.

Youth Development
2
TogetherAustin

To connect Central Texans to resources by reducing barriers expanding access and filling gaps in service.

Education
3
Austin Justice Coalition

Austin Justice Coalition educates, organizes, and empowers communities in Austin to build racial equity and dismantle systems of oppression through advocacy, policy change, and community programs.

Human Services
4
Eqtx Equality Texas dba Equality Texas

EQTX Equality Texas dba Equality Texas works to secure full equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer Texans through political action, education, community organizing, and collaboration.

—
5
Raise Texas

RAISE Texas advances equitable policies and programs that foster financial security and economic mobility for low- and moderate-income Texans. We equip, innovate and advocate to reduce disparities, remove barriers and build opportunities…

Human Services
6
HousingWorks Austin

To provide research, education and advocacy related to affordable housing

Housing & Shelter
7
Center for Public Policy Priorities

At the Every Texan, we believe in a Texas that offers everyone the chance to compete and succeed in life. We envision a Texas where everyone is healthy, well educated, and financially secure. We want the best Texas, a proud state that sets…

Public Benefit
8
Center for Austin Independent Journalism

To equip Austinites to make informed decisions through independent, in-depth reporting, diverse opinions, and civil dialogue. A strong local press is essential for a healthy community and democracy. We work to make Austin a more empowered…

Arts & Culture
9
Integrated Care Collaboration

ICC (dba Connxus) is a nonprofit alliance of health care providers in Central Texas dedicated to collecting, analyzing and sharing health information to improve healthcare quality and cost efficiency across the continuum of care.

Health
10
American Civil Liberties Union of Texas Inc

The ACLU of Texas works with communities, at the State Capitol, and in the courts to protect and advance civil rights and civil liberties for every Texan, no exceptions.

—
11
Austin Coming Together

To increase the collective impact of our member organization on improving education economic development outcomes within the Austin Community.

Education
12
Austin City Lutherans

Address food and housing insecurity for Austin-area low income families.

Religion
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Austin Community Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Hill Country Ride for Aids Inc. 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

14 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/14
Grantees still filing
9/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Measure Austin: $50,000 · EducationMeasure AustinCOMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF CENTRAL TEXAS: $32,000 · EducationCOMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF…TEXAS STATE INDEPENDENT LIVING COUNCIL: $30,000 · HealthTEXAS STATE INDEPEND…Alliance for African American Health in Central Texas: $20,000 · HealthAlliance for African…Hill Country Ride for AIDS Inc: $15,750 · HealthHill Country Ride fo…Texas Appleseed: $50,000 · Community ImprovementTexas AppleseedSVP AUSTIN INC: $10,000 · Community ImprovementSVP AUSTIN INCAFFECT CHANGE INC: $30,000 · OtherAFFECT CHANGE I…Children's Optimal Health: $20,000 · OtherChildren's Opti…BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF AUSTIN AND TRAVIS COUNTY INC: $22,500 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS AND GIRL…LATINITAS INC: $20,000 · Youth DevelopmentLATINITAS INCJEREMIAH PROGRAM: $20,000 · Housing & ShelterEnding Community Homelessness Coalition Inc: $20,000 · Human ServicesAUSTIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · Philanthropy
Education$82,000Health$65,750Community Improvement$60,000Other$50,000Youth Development$42,500Housing & Shelter$20,000Human Services$20,000Philanthropy$20,000

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 budgetTexas Appleseed: $50,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetMeasure Austin: $50,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetCOMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF CENTRAL TEXAS: $32,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTEXAS STATE INDEPENDENT LIVING COUNCIL: $30,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetAFFECT CHANGE INC: $30,000 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF AUSTIN AND TRAVIS COUNTY INC: $22,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetJEREMIAH PROGRAM: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEnding Community Homelessness Coalition Inc: $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLATINITAS INC: $20,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetChildren's Optimal Health: $20,000 over 1y, 9.3% of budgetAlliance for African American Health in Central Texas: $20,000 over 1y, 8.4% of budgetAUSTIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHill Country Ride for AIDS Inc: $15,750 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetSVP AUSTIN INC: $10,000 over 1y, 7.4% 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.

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.

Austin Community Foun…St David's FoundationGreater Houston Commu…Texas Instruments Fou…Shell USA Company Fou…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Austin Community Foundation IncTX23.4× affinity9 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Austin Community Foundation Inc · St David's Foundation · Greater Houston Community Foundation · Texas Instruments Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Mission Capital funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mission Capital. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 14 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2024, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Mission Capital’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