Skip to content
Ned O and Linda Miller Charitable at a glance

· Private foundation

Ned O and Linda Miller Charitable

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$59k
Granted FY2025still arriving
23
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Human Services$149kHousing & Shelter$99kHealth$55kYouth Development$43kEducation$38kCrime & Legal$38kFood & Nutrition$35kArts & Culture$13kOther$0
02FY2025 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$914k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER$5,000
THE PARC$5,000
PRISONER RE-ENTRY PROGRAM (PREP)$4,000
ANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE$4,000
Individual grant recipient$3,750
FAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES$3,500
ADVO HOPE TO OPPORTUNITIES$3,000
THE HOPE AND HEALING PLACE$2,600
AMARILLO AREA CASA$2,500
Individual grant recipient$2,500
OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL$2,500
THE BRIDGE$2,500
BUCKNER CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICE$2,500
WILD WEST REHABILITATION CENTER$2,000
HOPE CHOICE$2,000
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 (FY17–25, $102k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%BUCKNER CHILDREN & FAMILY SERVICES: $5k → 14%BUCKNER CHILDREN & FAMILY SERVICES: $1k → 14%BUCKNER CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICE: $3k → 20%BUCKNER CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICE: $3k → 20%BUCKNER CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICE: $3k → 20%BUCKNER CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICE: $3k → 20%THE BRIDGE: $3k → 20%THE BRIDGE: $3k → 20%THE BRIDGE: $3k → 20%THE BRIDGE: $3k → 20%THE BRIDGE: $3k → 20%THE BRIDGE: $3k → 20%THE BRIDGE: $3k → 20%THE BRIDGE: $3k → 20%THE BRIDGE: $1k → 20%ANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE: $5k → 20%THE PARC: $5k → 20%ANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE: $5k → 20%ANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE: $5k → 20%ANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE: $5k → 20%ANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE: $5k → 20%ANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE: $5k → 20%ANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE: $4k → 20%ANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE: $4k → 20%AMARILLO CHILDREN'S HOME: $4k → 20%THE PARC: $3k → 20%AMARILLO CHILDREN'S HOME: $3k → 20%AMARILLO CHILDREN'S HOME: $3k → 20%MEALS ON WHEELS: $3k → 20%MEALS ON WHEELS: $2k → 20%MEALS ON WHEELS: $2k → 20%MEALS ON WHEELS: $2k → 20%AMARILLO CHILDREN'S HOME: $1k → 20%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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$476k · 32 repeat orgs$52k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +10% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

32 repeat relationships: 19 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

32
13

Total granted

$476k
$44k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+10%
0%

Still filing today

72%
15%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k 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 ServicesHealthArts & CultureYouth DevelopmentRecreation & SportsReligionOther
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

  • AC
    ANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE
    8× · 2018–2025 · $38k · revenue +36%
  • DW
    DOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER INC
    6× · 2017–2025 · $36k · revenue +7%
  • OS
    OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL INC
    7× · 2017–2025 · $31k · revenue +28%

Funded once

  • TC
    TURN CENTER
    one grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue 0%
  • BB
    BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS
    one grant, 2018 · $5k
  • PP
    PANHANDLE PROMISE PROJECT
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
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
Central Texas Children's Home

To provide family services and to provide residential child care for dependent children where there is a need to assist children and families disrupted by problems.

Human Services
2
Hendrick Home for Children
—
3
Hope's Door New Beginning Center

The mission of hope's door new beginning center is to offer intervention and prevention services to individuals and families affected by intimate partner and family violence and to provide education programs that enhance the community's…

Human Services
4
El Paso Center for Children Inc

El paso center for children, inc's purpose is to provide homes for dependent and neglected children and an array of support services for emotionally disturbed children, adolescents, and their families. the organization operates entirely in…

—
5
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
6
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
7
Parker County Center of Hope Inc

Helping people in poverty or crisis with basic assistance, job preparedness and educational opportunities.

Human Services
8
Atascosa Health Center Inc

Health care services are provided to low to moderate income families who are residents of South Texas. Services are provided at a low cost are based on abiilty to pay base. Approximately 18,022 patients were served in the fiscal year.

Health
9
The Retreat Home for Children

Our mission is to show the love of christ to each and every child and family towhom we serve and beyond. we do this by creating a culture where the needs of children,families, and staff are seen and met in creative and innovative ways.

Crime & Legal
10
Medical Center League House of Amarillo Texas Inc

To serve as a home away from home for patients and their families coming to amarillo, texas for health care treatment.

Health
11
The Parenting Cottage

The vision of the parenting cottage is to build a strong community by first building strong families. the vision is implemented through the delivery of program services, adhering to the agency's mission statement of providing hope,…

Human Services
12
Tarrant County Homeless Coalition

Tarrant County Homeless Coalition leads the community solution to homelessness in greater Tarrant and Parker counties by serving as a catalyst for community transformation.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Amarillo Wesley Community Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Meals On Wheels. 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

28 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. 28 of the 50 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/28
Grantees still filing
15/28
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER INC: $35,624 · OtherDOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER INCFAMILY SUPPORT SERVICES: $35,500 · OtherFAMILY SUPPORT SERVICESHIGH PLAINS CHILDREN'S HOME AND FAMILY SERVICES INC: $35,000 · OtherHIGH PLAINS CHILDREN'S HOME AND FAMILY SERVICES INCOPPORTUNITY SCHOOL INC: $31,000 · OtherOPPORTUNITY SCHOOL INCPRISONER RE-ENTRY PROGRAM (PREP): $27,000 · OtherPRISONER RE-ENTRY PROGRAM (PREP)Individual grant recipient: $20,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMANN ALUMNI FOUNDATION: $15,000 · OtherPREPARE INC: $14,000 · OtherPANHANDLE ADULT REBUILDING CENTER: $13,000 · OtherMAVERICK BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB: $11,500 · OtherAMARILLO WESLEY COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $11,500 · Other+19 more: $83,050 · Other+19 moreANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE: $38,000 · Human ServicesANOTHER CHANCE HOUSETHE BRIDGE: $21,000 · Human ServicesTHE BRIDGEBUCKNER CHILDREN & FAMILY SERVICES INC: $16,000 · Human ServicesBUCKNER CHILDREN & FA…PRESBYTERIAN HOME FOR CHILDREN: $10,500 · Human ServicesPRESBYTERIAN HOME FOR…MEALS ON WHEELS: $8,500 · Human ServicesMEALS ON WHEELSTHE PARC: $8,000 · Human ServicesTHE PARCCOALITION OF HEALTH SERVICES INC: $15,000 · HealthCOALITION…MARCH OF DIMES INC: $15,000 · HealthMARCH OF …TURN CENTER: $5,420 · HealthTURN CENT…THE HOPE AND HEALING PLACE INC: $4,600 · HealthTHE HOPE …HOPE CHOICE INC: $2,000 · Health+1 more: $1,000 · HealthMAVERICK BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF AMARILLO INC: $12,500 · Youth DevelopmentYOUTH SUCCESS PROJECT: $8,500 · Youth DevelopmentWINDOW ON A WIDER WORLD INC: $7,500 · Arts & CultureDON HARRINGTON DISCOVERY CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $4,000 · Arts & CultureHOODOO ART FOUNDATION: $1,500 · Arts & CultureAMARILLO AREA COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES INC: $11,500 · Civil RightsTYLER STREET RESOURCE CENTER INC: $7,000 · Recreation & SportsEASTRIDGE MISSION CENTER: $4,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$332,174Human Services$102,000Health$43,020Youth Development$21,000Arts & Culture$13,000Civil Rights$11,500Recreation & Sports$11,000

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 budgetANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE: $38,000 over 8y, 0.5% of budgetDOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER INC: $35,624 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetHIGH PLAINS CHILDREN'S HOME AND FAMILY SERVICES INC: $35,000 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetOPPORTUNITY SCHOOL INC: $31,000 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetTHE BRIDGE: $21,000 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetBUCKNER CHILDREN & FAMILY SERVICES INC: $16,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetCOALITION OF HEALTH SERVICES INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetMARCH OF DIMES INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMAVERICK BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF AMARILLO INC: $12,500 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetAMARILLO AREA COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES INC: $11,500 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetAMARILLO WESLEY COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $11,500 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetPRESBYTERIAN HOME FOR CHILDREN: $10,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHIGH PLAINS FOOD BANK: $9,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetYOUTH SUCCESS PROJECT: $8,500 over 3y, 8.9% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS: $8,500 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetTHE PARC: $8,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetWINDOW ON A WIDER WORLD INC: $7,500 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetTYLER STREET RESOURCE CENTER INC: $7,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetMISSION AMARILLO: $7,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetTURN CENTER: $5,420 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMARILLO AREA FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE HOPE AND HEALING PLACE INC: $4,600 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetDON HARRINGTON DISCOVERY CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $4,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetHidden Falls Ranch: $4,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetEASTRIDGE MISSION CENTER: $4,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetHOODOO ART FOUNDATION: $1,500 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetPANHANDLE BREAST HEALTH: $1,000 over 1y, 0.8% 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 ANOTHER CHANCE HOUSE ↗
  • Who funds DOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds HIGH PLAINS CHILDREN'S HOME AND FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds OPPORTUNITY SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds THE BRIDGE ↗
  • Who funds BUCKNER CHILDREN & FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds COALITION OF HEALTH SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds MARCH OF DIMES INC ↗
  • Who funds MAVERICK BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF AMARILLO INC ↗
  • Who funds AMARILLO AREA COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES INC ↗
  • Who funds AMARILLO WESLEY COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds PRESBYTERIAN HOME FOR CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds HIGH PLAINS FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds YOUTH SUCCESS PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS ↗
  • Who funds THE PARC ↗
  • Who funds WINDOW ON A WIDER WORLD INC ↗
  • Who funds TYLER STREET RESOURCE CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds MISSION AMARILLO ↗
  • Who funds TURN CENTER ↗
  • Who funds AMARILLO AREA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE HOPE AND HEALING PLACE INC ↗
  • Who funds DON HARRINGTON DISCOVERY CENTER FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Hidden Falls Ranch ↗
  • Who funds EASTRIDGE MISSION CENTER ↗

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.

Amarillo Area Foundat…Dr Kent Roberts & Ile…Josephine Anderson Ch…Kimble Foundation Tru…High Plains Christian…Mary E Bivins Foundat…William & Louise Mull…Cj and Syble Fowlston…Mays FoundationXcel Energy FoundationAmarillo Business Fou…The Don & Sybil Harri…
Amarillo Area Foundation IncTX54.9× affinity24 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amarillo Area Foundation Inc · Dr Kent Roberts & Ilene Roberts Balliett Foundation · Josephine Anderson Charitable Trust · Kimble Foundation Trust · High Plains Christian Ministries Foundation · Mary E Bivins Foundation · William & Louise Mullins Foundation · Cj and Syble Fowlston Charitable Trust · Mays Foundation · Xcel Energy Foundation · Amarillo Business Foundation · The Don & Sybil Harrington 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 Ned O and Linda Miller Charitable funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ned O and Linda Miller Charitable. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’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
    11report 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 50 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 Ned O and Linda Miller’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