Skip to content

· Public charity

Texas Association of Community Action Agencies Inc

Provide a unified voice to community action agencies and operate programs to increase the capacity of organizations to serve low income texans.

$3.7M
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1.4M
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Environment$26MHuman Services$3.1MPublic Safety & Disaster$2.2MCommunity Improvement$2.0MFood & Nutrition$7k
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $18k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $274k
  • $250k+4 grants · $3.4M
$250,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DALLAS CO HEALTH & HUMAN SVCS$1,378,000
CITY OF FORT WORTH$1,180,000
GREATER EAST TX COMM ACTION A$597,067
HILL COUNTRY COMM ACTION ASSO$250,000
ROLLING PLAINS MANAGEMENT COR$194,072
TEXOMA COUNCIL OF GOVTS$80,000
EOAC OF PLANNING REGION XI$18,288
EAC OF GULF COAST$6,786
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, $3.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 94% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%Combined Community Action: $204k → 12%Economic Opport Advance Corp: $160k → 16%Rolling Plains Mgmt Corp: $505k → 17%Nueces Co Comm Action: $46k → 17%West TX Opport: $111k → 22%Brazos Valley Comm Act Agency: $171k → 22%Combined Community Action: $17k → 12%Economic Opport Advance Corp: $113k → 16%Rolling Plains Mgmt Corp: $462k → 17%West TX Opport: $104k → 22%Combined Community Action: $15k → 12%Economic Opport Advance Corp: $108k → 16%Rolling Plains Mgmt Corp: $460k → 17%West TX Opport: $75k → 22%COMBINED COMMUNITY ACTION: $7k → 12%Economic Opport Advance Corp: $47k → 16%Rolling Plains Mgmt Corp: $397k → 17%West TX Opport: $70k → 22%Economic Opport Advance Corp: $35k → 16%Rolling Plains Mgmt Corp: $247k → 17%West TX Opport: $47k → 22%Economic Opport Advance Corp: $33k → 16%ROLLING PLAINS MANAGEMENT COR: $194k → 17%West TX Opport: $43k → 22%ECONOMIC OPPORT ADVANCE CORP: $26k → 16%ROLLING PLAINS MANAGEMENT COR: $82k → 17%WEST TEXAS OPPORTUNITIES INC: $29k → 22%EOAC OF PLANNING REGION XI: $25k → 16%ROLLING PLAINS MANAGEMENT COR: $81k → 17%EOAC OF PLANNING REGION XI: $18k → 16%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$33M · 15 repeat orgs$429k to everyone else

15 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
5

Total granted

$33M
$429k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+60%

Still filing today

67%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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 ServicesCommunity ImprovementFood & NutritionOther
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

  • RP
    ROLLING PLAINS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
    8× · 2017–2025 · $2.4M · revenue +83%
  • HC
    HILL COUNTRY COMMUNITY ACTION ASSOCIATION INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +28%
  • WT
    WEST TEXAS OPPORTUNITIES INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $480k · revenue +20%

Funded once

  • BV
    BRAZOS VALLEY COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC
    one grant, 2017 · $171k · revenue +19%
  • CA
    Community Action Corporation of South Texasgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $104k · revenue +60%
  • ST
    So Tx Reg Planning Comm
    one grant, 2017 · $102k
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
Texas Association of Community Action Agencies Inc

Provide a unified voice to community action agencies and operate programs to increase the capacity of organizations to serve low income texans.

Human Services
2
Community Council of South Central Texas Inc

To be the service delivery agent to the poor. the agency will identify needs and prioritize them and promote, secure, and use all available resources to alleviate poverty. our intent is to enable low-income individuals and families to…

—
3
Cenla Community Action Committee Inc

CENLA Community Action Committee, Inc. is a multi-funded non-profit community based organization designed to stimulate available resources to enable low-income individuals and families to attain

—
4
Ozarks Area Community Action Corporation

Alleviating the causes and conditions of poverty in a ten county area of Southwest Missouri.

Human Services
5
Community Action Agency Inc

To aid low income families with early education, energy assistance, nutrition help and other services.

Human Services
6
Community Action Agency of Talladega Clay Randolph Calhoun & Cleburne Count

The community action agency of talladega, clay, randolph, calhoun, and cleburne counties is committed to reducing and/or eliminating the causes and consequences of poverty for families and communities through comprehensive educational and…

Community Improvement
7
Washita Valley Community Action Council

To assist individuals and families in our communities through public and private partnerships to improve the quality of their lives by minimizing the effects of poverty, promoting self-sufficiency and advocating for social change.

Human Services
8
Community Action Inc of Central Texas

Established in 1965, community action, inc. of central texas has continuously worked to assist low to moderate income families in central texas by providing a variety of social services and economic opportunities. the agency has four areas…

Human Services
9
Community Action Agency of South Alabama Inc

Administration of federal, state and local awards and grants for the poverty sector of a 7 county area in alabama, providing headstart education, food, shelter, maintenance, and weatherization programs.

—
10
Community Action Agency of Northwest Alabama Inc

Our mission is to reduce the causes and adverse consequences of poverty and to empower low-income individuals, families and communities to achieve self-sufficiency through advocacy, resource utilization and service delivery.

—
11
Concho Valley Workforce Development Board

CVWDB was founded to provide policy and program guidance for the workforce development and training programs and operate these programs in a manner that would create sustainable economic opportunities for all residents of the of the 13…

Employment
12
Community Action Commission of Fayette County

Administers grants and contracts to help the lives of those individuals who fall below the poverty level.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hill Country Community Action Association Inc; the most unlike its peers is Tri-County Community Action Inc. 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 20 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
11/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DALLAS COUNTY ELECTIONS: $11,786,735 · OtherDALLAS COUNTY ELECTIONSCITY OF FORT WORTH: $7,968,677 · OtherCITY OF FORT WORTHGreater East TX Comm Action Prog: $4,780,961 · OtherGreater East TX Comm Action ProgTexoma Council of Govts: $1,327,794 · Other+4 more: $862,381 · OtherROLLING PLAINS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION: $2,427,749 · Human ServicesROLLING PLAINS…ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ADVANCEMENT CORP OF PLANNING REGION XI: $564,636 · Human ServicesECONOMIC OPPOR…WEST TEXAS OPPORTUNITIES INC: $479,509 · Human ServicesWEST TEXAS OPP…COMBINED COMMUNITY ACTION INC: $242,209 · Human ServicesCOMBINED COMMU…BRAZOS VALLEY COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC: $170,970 · Human ServicesTRI-COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION INC: $144,906 · Human Services+2 more: $149,722 · Human ServicesHILL COUNTRY COMMUNITY ACTION ASSOCIATION INC: $2,037,338 · Community Improvement+2 more: $56,655 · Community ImprovementECONOMIC ACTION COMMITTEE OF THE GULF COAST: $50,369 · Food & Nutrition
Other$26,726,548Human Services$4,179,701Community Improvement$2,093,993Food & Nutrition$50,369

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetROLLING PLAINS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION: $2,427,749 over 8y, 3.0% of budgetHILL COUNTRY COMMUNITY ACTION ASSOCIATION INC: $2,037,338 over 9y, 1.8% of budgetECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ADVANCEMENT CORP OF PLANNING REGION XI: $564,636 over 9y, 0.7% of budgetWEST TEXAS OPPORTUNITIES INC: $479,509 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetCONCHO VALLEY COMMUNITY ACTION AGCY: $329,882 over 4y, 4.0% of budgetCOMBINED COMMUNITY ACTION INC: $242,209 over 4y, 7.2% of budgetBRAZOS VALLEY COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC: $170,970 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTRI-COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION INC: $144,906 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetCommunity Action Corporation of South Texas: $104,123 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetGULF COAST COMMUNITY SERVICES ASSOCIATION: $50,412 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetECONOMIC ACTION COMMITTEE OF THE GULF COAST: $50,369 over 3y, 4.5% of budgetBIG BEND COMMUNITY ACTION COMMITTEE INC: $48,048 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetNueces County Community Action Agency: $45,599 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetEL PASO COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PROJECT BRAVO INC: $6,243 over 1y, 0.1% 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 ROLLING PLAINS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds HILL COUNTRY COMMUNITY ACTION ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITIES ADVANCEMENT CORP OF PLANNING REGION XI ↗
  • Who funds WEST TEXAS OPPORTUNITIES INC ↗
  • Who funds CONCHO VALLEY COMMUNITY ACTION AGCY ↗
  • Who funds COMBINED COMMUNITY ACTION INC ↗
  • Who funds BRAZOS VALLEY COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC ↗
  • Who funds TRI-COUNTY COMMUNITY ACTION INC ↗
  • Who funds Community Action Corporation of South Texas ↗
  • Who funds GULF COAST COMMUNITY SERVICES ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds ECONOMIC ACTION COMMITTEE OF THE GULF COAST ↗
  • Who funds BIG BEND COMMUNITY ACTION COMMITTEE INC ↗
  • Who funds Nueces County Community Action Agency ↗
  • Who funds EL PASO COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM PROJECT BRAVO INC ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA1.3× affinity8 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Texas Association of Community Action Agencies Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Texas Association of Community Action Agencies Inc. 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 20 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 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 Texas Association of Community Action Agencies’ filings →

    More from the funding graph