· Public charity
Sherman Service League
To foster interest among its members in the social, economic, educa- tional cultural and civic comditions of the community and to encourage members to use their volunteer time effectively in service to t
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2019.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 11 grants below total $83,834 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $115,024 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $31,190 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Grand Central St | $9,000 |
| Crisis Center | $8,000 |
| Grayson Co Welfa | $8,000 |
| Grayson Co Child | $8,000 |
| House of Eli | $8,000 |
| Masterkey Minist | $8,000 |
| Family Promise | $7,500 |
| Boys& Girls Club | $7,500 |
| Locust Fire Dep | $7,000 |
| Habitat Humanity | $6,834 |
| North Tx Youth C | $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 (FY17–19, $51k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, 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 +55% since the first grant, against +15% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2019, 1 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (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 FY2019, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
- GCGRAYSON COUNTY CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER INC3× · 2017–2019 · $28k · revenue +55%
- GCGrayson County Welfare Board Inc3× · 2017–2019 · $26k · revenue +14%
- GGGRAYSON GRAND CENTRAL STATION3× · 2017–2019 · $25k · revenue +205%
Funded once
- WVWESLEY VILLAGE RETIREMENT HOME INCone grant, 2018 · $9k · revenue +7%
- FRFOUR RIVERS OUTREACH INCone grant, 2017 · $8k · revenue +15%
- DPDENISON PERFORMING ARTS INCone grant, 2017 · $7k
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.
CASA (Court Appointed Special Advocates) of Grayson County is a non-profit organization dedicated to training and equipping our community to protect children, empower families, and advocate for positive outcomes for children involved in…
Provide Group and Foster care for Homeless Children and Counseling
To provide children, family and social services to the community of gilmer county.
Provides support and services to individuals from 5 years to seniors with developmental disabilities and/or phsyical limitations.
Homeless shelter that provides temporary lodging
Grace House exists to rescue and advocate for women and families at risk.
The gentry house, inc. is an emergency transitional homeless shelter to help families with children in the region of murray and calloway county, ky. residents are given rent and utility assistance.
The Crisis Center of Russell County was organized to provide assistance and temporary housing to victims of domestic abuse through secured temporary housing and education with job placement to transition them back into society. In…
CASA of Williamson County, TX exists to empower community volunteers to advocate for children who have experienced abuse or neglect to find loving, safe, and permanent homes.
Providing the shelter and counseling for the abused women and children
Senior Center facility for the local Meals on Wheels production.
Providing facilities related to the investigation and treatment of victims of child abuse and to provide education and coordination to child abuse prevention efforts by various organizations in Garfield County, OK.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Grayson County Juvenile Alternatives Inc North Texas Youth Connection and the most unlike its peers is Locust Community Volunteer Fire Dep. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
16 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. 16 of the 17 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 GRAYSON COUNTY CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Grayson County Welfare Board Inc ↗
- Who funds GRAYSON GRAND CENTRAL STATION ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SHERMAN INC ↗
- Who funds Grayson County Women's Crisis Line Inc ↗
- Who funds GRAYSON COUNTY JUVENILE ALTERNATIVES INC NORTH TEXAS YOUTH CONNECTION ↗
- Who funds CHILD AND FAMILY GUIDANCE CENTER OF TEXOMA ↗
- Who funds MASTERKEY MINISTRIES OF GRAYSON COUNTY ↗
- Who funds FAMILY PROMISE OF GRAYSON COUNTY ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL GRAYSON COUNTY ↗
- Who funds WESLEY VILLAGE RETIREMENT HOME INC ↗
- Who funds HOUSE OF ELI INC ↗
- Who funds FOUR RIVERS OUTREACH INC ↗
- Who funds LOCUST COMMUNITY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEP ↗
- Who funds HOME HOSPICE OF GRAYSON COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds VOLUNTEER SERVICES COUNCIL OF TEXOMA COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
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: Texas Instruments Foundation · United Way of Grayson County Inc · Texoma Medical Center Volunteers · W B Munson Foundation Xxxxx5008 · Elias & Hanna Regensburger Foundation · The Oliver Dewey Mayor Foundation · Texoma Community Foundation · Clara B & W Aubrey Smith Charitable · Children's Clinic of Sherman · Wilson N Jones Community Foundation · Harry H Gibson Family Foundation · North Texas Food Bank
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 Sherman Service League 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 Sherman Service League?
Find your warmest path to Sherman Service League 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.