Skip to content

· Community foundation

Nacogdoches County United Way

Allocations of donations to non-profit organizations.

$230k
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$23k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Health$504kHuman Services$263kCrime & Legal$177kReligion$126kFood & Nutrition$126kEducation$122kYouth Development$59kHousing & Shelter$55kOther$0
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $182,200, the rows itemized in this filing. The $229,527 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $47,327 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $175k
$12,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$476k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NACOGDOCHES TREATMENT CENTER$23,000
NACOGDOCHES COUNTY AGING COMM$18,000
NACOGDOCHES HOPE FOOD PANTRY$18,000
CASA OF DEEP EAST TEXAS$17,500
COMMUNITY RX HELP$17,000
SOLID FOUNDATION ASSOCIATION$16,000
FAMILY CRISIS CENTER$12,000
THE HELPING HOUSE$12,000
ANGELINA ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN$11,200
LOVE INC$10,500
ALCOHOL & DRUG ABUSE COUNCIL$10,000
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF DEEP EAST$10,000
GOD'S OPEN DOOR TO ETERNAL LIFE$7,000
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 (FY21–24, $46k) land where the poverty rate runs at 23%, against an area that typically sits at 16%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 16%GOD'S OPEN DOOR TO ETERNAL LIFE: $8k → 23%GOD'S OPEN DOOR TO ETERNAL LIFE: $7k → 23%GOD'S OPEN DOOR TO ETERNAL LIFE: $7k → 23%GOD'S OPEN DOOR TO ETERNAL LIFE: $6k → 23%NACOGDOCHES COUNTY AGING COMM: $18k → 23%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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.4M · 18 repeat orgs$32k to everyone else

18 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
2

Total granted

$1.4M
$14k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
+28%

Still filing today

44%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHuman ServicesCrime & LegalPhilanthropyReligionOther
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

  • CR
    COMMUNITY RX HELP
    8× · 2017–2024 · $140k · revenue +13% · 71% of their budget
  • CO
    CASA OF DEEP EAST TEXAS INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $129k · revenue +33%
  • SF
    SOLID FOUNDATION ASSOCIATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $122k · revenue +130% · 29% of their budget

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $8k
  • GG
    GLORY GANG MINISTRIES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $6k · revenue +28%
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
Texas Foster Care & Adoption Serv

A state of texas licensed foster care and adoption agency that identifies and provides approved healing foster homes for children.

Human Services
2
Northeast Texas Child Advocacy Center Inc

To bring hope and healing while working together to break the cycle of child abuse.

Human Services
3
Hope of South Texas Inc

To provide the highest quality of appropriate investigative, assessment, and ongoing thrapeutic treatment services for abused chilren and their families throught the four county service area (victoria, jackson, goliad, and dewitt).

—
4
Talladega County Child Advocacy Center Inc

Interview facility for child abuse victims.

Human Services
5
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Milam County
—
6
Northeast Texas Casa Inc

To work to ensure children receive the needed services to overcome abuse and neglect.

Civil Rights
7
Sunny Glen Children's Home Inc

Sunny Glen Childrens Home, Inc. cares for children in need. Our care will be competent, compassionate and professional. We will help every child achieve their greatest potential-physically, emotionally, spiritually and academically.

Human Services
8
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
9
Shelter Agencies for Families in East Texas

To provide shelter to abused families.

Human Services
10
Hope House Inc

Counseling services to individuals for substance abuse, domestic violence, general classes, anger management, day sessions, parenting classes, ged and other educational classes. supply clothing and food to needy.

Health
11
Caritas Family Assistance Network Inc

The organization will provide assistance to families and individuals in need in the fredericksburg, texas community. the organization will also be a point of contact to refer families to other non-profit organizations within the community…

Human Services
12
Casa of Tipton County

Child Advocacy Services

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Family Crisis Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Helping House. 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

10 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. 10 of the 21 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
9/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NACOGDOCHES TREATMENT CENTER: $200,000 · OtherNACOGDOCHES TREATMENT CENTERNACOGDOCHES SENIOR CENTER: $143,500 · OtherNACOGDOCHES SENIOR CENTERLOVE INC: $92,800 · OtherLOVE INCALCOHOL & DRUG ABUSE COUNCIL: $68,000 · OtherALCOHOL & DRUG ABUSE COUNCILNACOGDOCHES HOPE FOOD PANTRY: $68,000 · OtherNACOGDOCHES HOPE FOOD PANTRYBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF DEEP EAST: $59,000 · OtherBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF DEEP EASTHAROLD'S HOUSE: $54,500 · OtherHAROLD'S HOUSE+4 more: $60,809 · Other+4 moreSOLID FOUNDATION ASSOCIATION: $121,750 · EducationSOLID FOUNDATION AS…THE HELPING HOUSE: $96,000 · EducationTHE HELPING HOUSENACOGDOCHES HOPE: $39,500 · EducationNACOGDOCHES HOPECASA OF DEEP EAST TEXAS INC: $129,150 · Crime & LegalCASA OF DEEP …ANGELINA ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC: $48,150 · Crime & LegalANGELINA ALLI…COMMUNITY RX HELP: $140,000 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY …FAMILY CRISIS CENTER INC: $90,500 · Human ServicesFAMILY CRI…GOD'S OPEN DOOR TO ETERNAL LIFE INC: $27,500 · Human ServicesGOD'S OPEN…NACOGDOCHES COUNTY AGING COMMITTEE: $18,000 · Human ServicesNACOGDOCHE…GLORY GANG MINISTRIES INC: $6,000 · Religion
Other$746,609Education$257,250Crime & Legal$177,300Philanthropy$140,000Human Services$136,000Religion$6,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOMMUNITY RX HELP: $140,000 over 8y, 71% of budgetCASA OF DEEP EAST TEXAS INC: $129,150 over 8y, 4.7% of budgetSOLID FOUNDATION ASSOCIATION: $121,750 over 8y, 29% of budgetTHE HELPING HOUSE: $96,000 over 8y, 4.4% of budgetFAMILY CRISIS CENTER INC: $90,500 over 8y, 1.6% of budgetANGELINA ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC: $48,150 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetNACOGDOCHES HOPE: $39,500 over 4y, 12% of budgetGOD'S OPEN DOOR TO ETERNAL LIFE INC: $27,500 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetNACOGDOCHES COUNTY AGING COMMITTEE: $18,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetGLORY GANG MINISTRIES INC: $6,000 over 1y, 4.8% 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 COMMUNITY RX HELP ↗
  • Who funds CASA OF DEEP EAST TEXAS INC ↗
  • Who funds SOLID FOUNDATION ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds THE HELPING HOUSE ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY CRISIS CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds ANGELINA ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
  • Who funds NACOGDOCHES HOPE ↗
  • Who funds GOD'S OPEN DOOR TO ETERNAL LIFE INC ↗
  • Who funds NACOGDOCHES COUNTY AGING COMMITTEE ↗
  • Who funds GLORY GANG MINISTRIES 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.

Charles & Lois Marie Bright FoundationTX15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Charles & Lois Marie Bright Foundation · 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 Nacogdoches County United Way funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Nacogdoches County United Way. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%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
    4report 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.

    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 21 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.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Nacogdoches County United Way’s filings →

    More from the funding graph