Skip to content
Spencer Charitable Foundation 711 N Carancahua St at a glance

· Private foundation

Spencer Charitable Foundation 711 N Carancahua St

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$85k
Granted FY2024still arriving
18
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$22k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Education$217kHuman Services$158kFood & Nutrition$125kHousing & Shelter$48kReligion$45kHealth$20kPhilanthropy$10kRecreation & Sports$6kOther$0
02FY2024 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k15 grants · $43k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $42k
$3,800
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$22,000
CAPITAL AREA FOOD BANK$10,000
SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY$10,000
BRAILLE INSTITUTE$5,000
SALVATION ARMY$4,500
CEDAR PARK FOOD PANTRY$4,000
HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN$4,000
CARNITAS OF AUSTIN$3,800
FAMILY ELDERCARE$3,800
MEALS ON WHEELS$3,500
KINGSLAND SHARE THE HARVEST$3,000
THE SAFE PLACE$2,500
CENTRAL TEXAS FOOD BANK$2,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
CENTRAL TEXAS SPCA$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 (FY17–24, $99k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN: $8k → 10%HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN: $8k → 10%HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN: $8k → 10%HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN: $7k → 10%HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN: $6k → 10%HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN: $6k → 10%HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN: $4k → 10%HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN: $4k → 10%FAMILY ELDERCARE: $4k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $4k → 10%FAMILY ELDERCARE: $4k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $4k → 10%FAMILY ELDERCARE: $4k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $4k → 10%FAMILY ELDERCARE: $4k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $4k → 10%FAMILY ELDERCARE: $4k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $4k → 10%FAMILY ELDERCARE: $2k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $2k → 10%FAMILY ELDERCARE: $2k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $2k → 10%FAMILY ELDERCARE: $2k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS: $2k → 10%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$698k · 26 repeat orgs$28k to everyone else

26 repeat relationships: 17 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
4

Total granted

$698k
$18k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+142%

Still filing today

46%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
Human ServicesEducationHealthFood & NutritionAnimalsOther
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

  • BAYLOR UNIVERSITY
    5× · 2017–2021 · $112k · revenue +57%
  • HH
    HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $50k · revenue +62%
  • CO
    CARITAS OF AUSTIN
    8× · 2017–2024 · $30k · revenue +43%

Funded once

  • CT
    CENTRAL TEXAS FIRST
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $5k
  • B
    BookSpringgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +142%
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
Feeding Texas

To lead a unified effort for a hunger-free texas.

Community Improvement
2
West Texas Food Bank

The WTFB exists to collect, purchase, and distribute food to feed the hungry in 19 counties in West Texas in partnership with volunteers and community organizations and to educate these partners and the public at large about the real face…

—
3
Food Bank of West Central Texas

To procure and distribute nutritional food to qualified agencies that feed the hungry of West Central Texas.

Food & Nutrition
4
North Texas Food Bank

To close the hunger gap in north texas by working through over 500 feeding partners to provide access to nutritious food and address the root causes of hunger.

—
5
Fort Bend Seniors Meals on Wheels and Much Much More

See Schedule OFort Bend Seniors Meals on Wheels provides comprehensive services, including Meals on Wheels, congregate meals, transportation, case management, health screenings, information and referral services, recreation, and more. Our…

Human Services
6
Regional East Texas Food Bank

Etfb's mission is to fight hunger and feed hope in east texas.

—
7
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
8
Shelter Agencies for Families in East Texas

To provide shelter to abused families.

Human Services
9
South Texas Food Bank

To alleviate hunger in the immediate service area through the distribution of food products donated by the usda, feeding america, area grocery stores, etc. which are distributed to the needy by way of area food banks and other qualified…

Community Improvement
10
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
11
Feeding America Texas

Feeding America Texas operates exclusively for charitable purposes by supporting food assistance, hunger relief, and community aid initiatives for individuals and families experiencing food insecurity throughout Texas. The organization…

Food & Nutrition
12
Visiting Nurse Association of Texas

Established in 1934, vna helps older adults live with dignity and independence at home by providing in-home care, food and friendship for the ill, hungry, and homebound.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Central Texas Food Bank 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

14 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. 14 of the 31 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)
14/14
Grantees still filing
8/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITY: $86,000 · OtherSAM HOUSTON STATE UNIVERSITYIndividual grant recipient: $67,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCAPITAL AREA FOOD BANK: $55,000 · OtherCAPITAL AREA FOOD BANKSALVATION ARMY: $46,000 · OtherSALVATION ARMYCRP CHR METRO MINISTRIES: $42,000 · OtherCRP CHR METRO MINISTRIESCARITAS OF AUSTIN: $30,200 · OtherCARITAS OF AUSTINAUSTIN CHILDREN SHELTER: $18,000 · Other+12 more: $73,000 · Other+12 moreHELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN INC: $50,000 · Human ServicesHELPING HAND HOME FOR…FREEDOM CENTER TEXAS: $37,000 · Human ServicesFREEDOM CENTER TEXASFAMILY ELDERCARE INC: $25,200 · Human ServicesFAMILY ELDERCARE INCMEALS ON WHEELS: $24,000 · Human ServicesMEALS ON WHEELSBAYLOR UNIVERSITY: $112,000 · EducationBAYLOR UNIVERSITYTHE TSTC FOUNDATION: $17,000 · EducationTHE TSTC FOUNDATION+1 more: $2,000 · EducationCentral Texas Food Bank Inc: $12,000 · Food & NutritionCAPITAL AREA FOOD BANK INC: $10,000 · Food & NutritionTHE BRIDGE BREAST NETWORK INC: $10,000 · HealthTEXAS LIONS CAMP INC: $6,000 · HealthCentral Texas SPCA: $4,000 · Animals
Other$417,200Human Services$136,200Education$131,000Food & Nutrition$22,000Health$16,000Animals$4,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBAYLOR UNIVERSITY: $112,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN INC: $50,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetFREEDOM CENTER TEXAS: $37,000 over 8y, 3.4% of budgetCARITAS OF AUSTIN: $30,200 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetFAMILY ELDERCARE INC: $25,200 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS: $24,000 over 8y, 3.1% of budgetTHE TSTC FOUNDATION: $17,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetCentral Texas Food Bank Inc: $12,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCAPITAL AREA FOOD BANK INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BRIDGE BREAST NETWORK INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetTEXAS LIONS CAMP INC: $6,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCentral Texas SPCA: $4,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetSUNRISE BEACH VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetBookSpring: $2,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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 BAYLOR UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds HELPING HAND HOME FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
  • Who funds FREEDOM CENTER TEXAS ↗
  • Who funds CARITAS OF AUSTIN ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY ELDERCARE INC ↗
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS ↗
  • Who funds THE TSTC FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Central Texas Food Bank Inc ↗
  • Who funds CAPITAL AREA FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds THE BRIDGE BREAST NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds TEXAS LIONS CAMP INC ↗
  • Who funds Central Texas SPCA ↗
  • Who funds SUNRISE BEACH VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds BookSpring ↗

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.

United Way WorldwideThe Blackbaud Giving …American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
United Way WorldwideVA12.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way Worldwide · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Spencer Charitable Foundation 711 N Carancahua St funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Spencer Charitable Foundation 711 N Carancahua St. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%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
    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 31 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Spencer Charitable Foundation 711 N Carancahua St’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