· Private foundation
San Angelo Health Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $16k
- $10k–50k18 grants · $419k
- $50k–250k14 grants · $1.4M
- $250k+2 grants · $654k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SAN ANGELO AREA FOUNDATION | $403,549 |
| LA ESPERANZA CLINIC | $250,000 |
| SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER | $222,236 |
| INSTITUTE FOR COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT INC (ICD) | $150,000 |
| PREGNANCY HELP CENTER OF CONCHO VALLEY | $125,000 |
| SAN ANGELO DIABETES COALITION | $125,000 |
| MHMR SERVICES FOR THE CONCHO VALLEY | $100,000 |
| SCHLEICHER COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY | $100,000 |
| SAN ANGELO AREA FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| WEST TEXAS COUNSELING & GUIDANCE | $92,240 |
| YMCA OF SAN ANGELO | $75,000 |
| JUNCTION COMMUNITY AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM & FAMILY CENTER | $75,000 |
| CONCHO VALLEY HOME FOR GIRLS | $55,000 |
| CONCHO VALLEY TURNING POINT | $50,000 |
| THE SALVATION ARMY | $50,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $1.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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 +34% since the first grant, against -12% for the ones you funded once.
51 repeat relationships — 20 still active in FY2024, 31 since wound down; 11 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $537k 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
- WTWEST TEXAS COUNSELING AND GUIDANCE7× · 2017–2024 · $1.9M · revenue +203%
- TWThe West Texas Rehabilitation Center3× · 2020–2023 · $1.6M · revenue +34%
- WTWEST TEXAS BOYS RANCH5× · 2017–2022 · $733k · revenue +118%
Funded once
- FCFORT CONCHO NATIONAL HISTORIC LANDMARK AND CITY OF SAN ANGELOone grant, 2021 · $500k
- CVConcho Valley Regional Food Bankgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $300k · revenue +40% · 29% of their budget
- BMBALLINGER MEMORIAL HOSPITALone grant, 2019 · $250k
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.
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…
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 protection, education, emergency medical treatment and rescue services to approx 140 sq miles in guadalupe county texas.
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.
To enhance the ability of families to protect, nuture, and educate their children in the first five years of life and enable them to enter school ready to learn.
The mission of the Good Samaritan Center is to provide a safe, Christ- Centered environment that gives our patients quality, coordinated and affordable healthcare.
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.
To provide services designed to meet the physical, social, and emotional needs of domestic violence and sexual assault victims by providing for immediate, short, and long-term needs.
Sa christian dental clinic's mission is to extend christ's healing by providing charitable dental care to underserved bexar county adults. the vision of the clinic is a commitment to creating a community in which dental care and optimal…
A state of texas licensed foster care and adoption agency that identifies and provides approved healing foster homes for children.
Crisis pregnancy counseling.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Way of the Concho Valley Inc and the most unlike its peers is Playland Communities 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 21. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 20% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 9% 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.
64 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. 64 of the 130 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 WEST TEXAS COUNSELING AND GUIDANCE ↗
- Who funds The West Texas Rehabilitation Center ↗
- Who funds SAN ANGELO AREA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WEST TEXAS BOYS RANCH ↗
- Who funds GALILEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP ↗
- Who funds SAN ANGELO DIABETES COALITION ↗
- Who funds San Angelo Museum of Fine Arts ↗
- Who funds LA ESPERANZA CLINIC INC ↗
- Who funds CONCHO VALLEY CENTER FOR HUMAN ADVANCEMENT ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds Concho Valley Regional Food Bank ↗
- Who funds SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER ↗
- Who funds CHRISTOVAL VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
- Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF CENTRAL TEXAS ↗
- Who funds LAKE IVIE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF GREATER WEST TEXAS ↗
- Who funds SAN ANGELO PERFORMING ARTS COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE CONCHO VALLEY ↗
- Who funds PREGNANCY HELP CENTER OF CONCHO VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds CONCHO VALLEY HOME FOR GIRLS INC ↗
- Who funds BALLINGER CARES INC ↗
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: San Angelo Area Foundation · Art and Eva Camunez Tucker Foundation · Mary Ellen Kent Bunyard Family Foundation · Kickapoo Springs Foundation · American Electric Power Foundation · F V Hall & Marylou Hall Childrens Crisis Fund · James B and Lois R Archer Charitable Foundation · Stribling Funding Corporation · United Way of the Concho Valley Inc · Methodist Healthcare Ministries of South Texas Inc · The Moody Foundation · Wayne & Jo Ann Moore Charitable Foundation
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 San Angelo Health Foundation 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.