Skip to content
Texas Farm Bureau Agriculture Research & Education Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Texas Farm Bureau Agriculture Research & Education Foundation

Initiate ag research and educational activities, disseminate information regarding education and marketing commodities.

$1.9M
Granted FY2017
39
Grants FY2017
2
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2017 · 39 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 39 grants below total $69,225, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,898,357 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,829,132 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$1,775
Median grant
2
States reached
$64k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MOBEETIE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
POTTER COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
DARROUZETT VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
MIAMI-ROBERTS COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
SHATTUCK VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
KELTON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
ARNETT VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
REYDON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
LIPSCOMB COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
SHAMROCK VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
ALLISON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
CANADIAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
WAKA VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
FARGO VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
GAGE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT$1,775
02The need
02

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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–17) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 41% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 15%PANHANDLE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 9%MIAMI-ROBERTS COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 10%DALHART VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 11%ALLISON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 11%GRUVER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 11%WOLFCREEK VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 12%STINNETT VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 12%STRATFORD VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 12%HIGGINS VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 14%WHEELER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 15%MCLEAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 17%WELLINGTON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 17%POTTER COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 20%SHATTUCK VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 15%REYDON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 16%WHITE DEER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 9%LOCUST GROVE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 11%SPEARMAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 11%FARNSWORTH VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 12%SKELLYTOWN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 12%LIPSCOMB COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 14%KELTON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 15%LEFORS VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 17%GAGE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 15%FRITCH VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 9%CANADIAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 11%WAKA VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 11%PERRYTON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 12%FOLLETT VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 14%SHAMROCK VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 15%HOOVER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 17%FARGO VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 15%GEM CITY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 11%DARROUZETT VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 14%BRISCOE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 15%HARMON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 15%BOOKER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 14%MOBEETIE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 15%ARNETT VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $2k → 15%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 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
Scotland Volunteer Fire Department

Volunteer fire department

Public Safety & Disaster
2
Frelsburg Volunteer Fire Dept

Provide firefighting services for frelsburg, texas area.

Public Safety & Disaster
3
Knifley Area Volunteer Fire Department
Public Safety & Disaster
4
Valley View Volunteer Fire Department

Volunteer Fire Department that responds to service calls to extinguish fires or help with medical emergencies in the area.

Public Safety & Disaster
5
Taylor Township Volunteer Fire Department
—
6
Stickleyville Volunteer Fire Dept

Fire department for the local community of stickleyville, va

Public Safety & Disaster
7
Broadview Volunteer Fire Department

Community volunteer fire deparment

Public Safety & Disaster
8
Strawn Volunteer Fire Department

Provide fire protection and emergency assistance to strawn, texas, and surrounding communities.

Public Safety & Disaster
9
Melvin Volunteer Fire Department Inc

Volunteer fire department

Public Safety & Disaster
10
Marlin Volunteer Fire Department
—
11
Clyde Volunteer Fire Department

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.

Public Safety & Disaster
12
Matador Motley County Volunteer Fire Department

Fire fighting and prevention

Public Safety & Disaster
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Miami-Roberts County Volunteer Fire Department Inc; the most unlike its peers is Mobeetie Volunteer Fire Department Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

12 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. 12 of the 33 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)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
10/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LIPSCOMB COUNTY AREA VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION INC: $8,875 · OtherLIPSCOMB COUNTY AREA VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION INCWAKA VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $5,325 · OtherWAKA VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT+25 more: $44,375 · Other+25 moreSKELLYTOWN AREA VOL FIRE AND EMS A: $1,775 · Public Safety & DisasterSKELLYTOWN AREA V…STINNETT AREA VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION: $1,775 · Public Safety & DisasterSTINNETT AREA VOL…MOBEETIE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $1,775 · Public Safety & DisasterMOBEETIE VOLUNTEE…WELLINGTON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $1,775 · Public Safety & DisasterWELLINGTON VOLUNT…HOOVER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT: $1,775 · Public Safety & DisasterHOOVER VOLUNTEER …MIAMI-ROBERTS COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $1,775 · Public Safety & DisasterMIAMI-ROBERTS COU…
Other$58,575Public Safety & Disaster$10,650

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLIPSCOMB COUNTY AREA VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION INC: $8,875 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetSKELLYTOWN AREA VOL FIRE AND EMS A: $1,775 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetDALHART VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $1,775 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetWELLINGTON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $1,775 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetHOOVER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT: $1,775 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCANADIAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC: $1,775 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetBRISCOE FIRE DEPT: $1,775 over 1y, 2.1% 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 LIPSCOMB COUNTY AREA VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds SKELLYTOWN AREA VOL FIRE AND EMS A ↗
  • Who funds STINNETT AREA VOLUNTEER FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds DALHART VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
  • Who funds MOBEETIE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds KELTON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds WELLINGTON VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds HOOVER VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT ↗
  • Who funds CANADIAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds MCLEAN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT ↗
  • Who funds MIAMI-ROBERTS COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT INC ↗
  • Who funds BRISCOE FIRE DEPT ↗

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.

The 100 Club of Amari…The Legett FoundationGray-Pampa Foundation…Amarillo Area Foundat…M K Brown Foundation …Kickapoo Springs Foun…Edward Jones Foundati…American Online Givin…
The 100 Club of Amarillo IncTX39.1× affinity16 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The 100 Club of Amarillo Inc · The Legett Foundation · Gray-Pampa Foundation Inc · Amarillo Area Foundation Inc · M K Brown Foundation Inc · Kickapoo Springs Foundation · Edward Jones Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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 Farm Bureau Agriculture Research & Education Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Texas Farm Bureau Agriculture Research & Education Foundation. 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
    5report 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 33 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 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2017, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Texas Farm Bureau Agriculture Research & Education’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