· Private foundation
Overlake Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k14 grants · $61k
- $10k–50k13 grants · $389k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $119k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TURNING POINT | $118,575 |
| HEART OF TX THERAPEUTIC RIDING CTR | $49,000 |
| UT SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER | $45,000 |
| CUTTING EDGE RETIREMENT FOUNDATION | $45,000 |
| GRACE HOUSE MINISTRIES | $45,000 |
| HORSEMEN FOR CHRIST | $45,000 |
| NORTHSIDE BAPTIST CHURCH | $35,000 |
| GREENWOOD BAPTIST CHURCH | $30,000 |
| SAVING HOPE ANIMAL RESCUE FUND | $25,000 |
| CAMP JOHN MARC | $20,000 |
| PASTOR RICK'S DAILY HOPE | $20,000 |
| RIVERTREE ACADEMY | $10,000 |
| CAREITY FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| THE ARRE FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| VICTORIA COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS ASS | $6,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $72k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +30% since the first grant, against +11% for the ones you funded once.
38 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $70k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- HFHorsemen for Christ9× · 2017–2025 · $351k · revenue +166%
- GHGRACE HOUSE MINISTRIES INC9× · 2017–2025 · $270k · revenue +109%
- CFCAREITY FOUNDATION9× · 2017–2025 · $232k · revenue +8%
Funded once
- TOTHE O'CONNOR FAMILY CEMETERY ASSOCIATIONone grant, 2019 · $23k · revenue +9%
- SASTARS AND STRIDES STABLES INCone grant, 2017 · $11k · revenue -22%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2019 · $10k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Fire Protection & Emergency Rescue
Provide firefighting services for frelsburg, texas area.
Fire, medical and other emergency first responders servicing rural brooks county in south texas
Fire, rescue and emergency medical operations for the residents of Freestone and Navarro Counties.
Volunteer fire department
To protect the lives and property of the citizens of the city and county of San Saba, Texas.
To provide emergency fire and medical services.
Fire fighting and prevention and rescue and emergency medical services
Volunteer fire department
Volunteer Fire Department, providing fire, rescue, and medical services to a population of approximately 22,000 residents, 24 hours per day, 365 days per year.
To provide fire suppression, fire investigation, and search and rescue services to the citizens of clyde and the surrounding rural areas of callahan co., tx.
Fire protection and rescue services
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Meyersville Volunteer Fire Department and the most unlike its peers is The Kathryn O'connor Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 24 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
30 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 30 of the 49 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds Horsemen for Christ ↗
- Who funds CUTTING EDGE RETIREMENT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HEART OF TEXAS THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds GRACE HOUSE MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds CAREITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE MICHELLE LYNN HOLSEY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RIVERTREE ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds MID-COAST FAMILY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds GCA ATHLETICS ↗
- Who funds SAVING HOPE ANIMAL RESCUE FUND ↗
- Who funds THE KATHRYN O'CONNOR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CHRIST'S KITCHEN ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS SOUTH TEXAS ↗
- Who funds PERPETUAL HELP HOME INC ↗
- Who funds BARROW NEUROLOGICAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE O'CONNOR FAMILY CEMETERY ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Raisin Volunteer Fire Department ↗
- Who funds VICTORIA COLLEGE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds QUAIL CREEK VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
- Who funds FANNIN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
- Who funds STARS AND STRIDES STABLES INC ↗
- Who funds BURTTSCHELL RESCUE RANCH ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Peach Mott Foundation Inc · South Texas Charitable Foundation · The Kathryn O'Connor Foundation · The O'Connor & Hewitt Foundation · Galvan Family Charitable Foundation · Dick Albert & Mary Charitable Tr · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Network for Good · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Overlake Foundation Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Overlake Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Overlake Foundation Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.