Skip to content
Texas Health Huguley Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Texas Health Huguley Inc

Our mission is to extend the healing ministry of christ by identifying and meeting the health needs of our community, providing quality, customer oriented and cost effective services, and ensuring access to those services.

$83k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2024.

Education$173kCommunity Improvement$86kPublic Benefit$42kHuman Services$38kFood & Nutrition$29kHealth$26kPublic Safety & Disaster$25kReligion$24kOther$0
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $60,420, the rows itemized in this filing. The $82,920 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $22,500 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.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $40k
$7,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$403M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BURLESON AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE$25,320
CITY OF BURLESON$15,000
HARVEST HOUSE$7,500
CITY OF CROWLEY$7,100
COMMUNITY HOSPICE OF TEXAS$5,500
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 (FY20–24, $34k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%MEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS: $24k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS CENTRAL TEXAS INC: $5k → 10%COMMUNITY HOSPICE OF TEXAS: $6k → 11%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $21k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 1 region. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

South America$21k · 100% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: MEDICAL EQUIPMENT

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$357k · 7 repeat orgs$117k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
6

Total granted

$357k
$104k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-11%
+37%

Still filing today

71%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k 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 ServicesCrime & LegalEducationHousing & ShelterHealthOther
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

  • SA
    SOUTHWESTERN ADVENTIST UNIVERSITY
    7× · 2017–2023 · $98k · revenue +26%
  • BA
    BURLESON AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
    4× · 2019–2024 · $80k · revenue +25%
  • BI
    BURLESON ISD
    4× · 2017–2023 · $42k

Funded once

  • SC
    Safe City Commission
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -73%
  • CM
    CRAZY8 MINISTRIES INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $24k · revenue +37%
  • CO
    CASA of Johnson County Inc
    one grant, 2020 · $22k · revenue -3%
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
Midwives College of Utah

Educate and train midwives to provide safe, professional, affordable and personal maternity and general health care.

Education
2
Crisis Assistance Center Inc dba Community Assistance Center

To provide emergency assistance to people in Montgomery County, TX who are in an unexpected crisis.

Human Services
3
Dallas-Fort Worth Hospital Council

The mission of the Dallas-Fort Worth Hospital Council is to drive evidence-based improvement in patient care and health equity throughout the region.

—
4
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
5
Regional West Health Services

Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.

Health
6
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
7
South Texas Pregnancy Care Center

Crisis pregnancy counseling.

Health
8
VolunteerNow

VolunteerNow transforms lives through volunteers. As the hub of volunteerism in North Texas, and a national thought leader, VolunteerNow provides a wide range of programs and services to build capacity for nonprofit and community…

Philanthropy
9
High Country Behavioral Health

HCBH provides mental health and substance abuse counseling.

Health
10
UnBound North Texas

Unbound North Texas exists to support survivors and resource the community to fight human trafficking through Survivor Advocacy, a 24/7 Drop-In Center, and Prevention and Awareness.

—
11
Eastland County Crisis Center Inc

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.

Human Services
12
Rio Rancho Chamber of Commerce

A regional Chamber committed to improving the quality of community life driven by business leadership mentorship advocacy and prosperity.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Meals On Wheels North Central Texas Inc; the most unlike its peers is Casa of Johnson County 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

10 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. 10 of the 15 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
4/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SOUTHWESTERN ADVENTIST UNIVERSITY: $97,500 · OtherSOUTHWESTERN ADVENTIST UNIVERSITYBURLESON AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $79,545 · OtherBURLESON AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCEBURLESON ISD: $41,750 · OtherBURLESON ISDYOUR HARVEST HOUSE: $38,100 · OtherYOUR HARVEST HOUSECITY OF BURLESON: $34,985 · OtherCITY OF BURLESON+3 more: $20,600 · Other+3 moreSafe City Commission: $25,000 · Crime & LegalSafe City C…CASA of Johnson County Inc: $22,000 · Crime & LegalCASA of Joh…BURLESON HIGHER EDUCATION OPPORTUNI: $36,500 · EducationMEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC: $28,800 · Human ServicesCommunity Healthcare of Texas: $5,500 · Human ServicesCRAZY8 MINISTRIES INC: $23,500 · Housing & ShelterPREGNANCY RESOURCES & MEDICAL CLINIC OF NORTH TX: $20,000 · Health
Other$312,480Crime & Legal$47,000Education$36,500Human Services$34,300Housing & Shelter$23,500Health$20,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSOUTHWESTERN ADVENTIST UNIVERSITY: $97,500 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetBURLESON AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $79,545 over 4y, 7.6% of budgetYOUR HARVEST HOUSE: $38,100 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetBURLESON HIGHER EDUCATION OPPORTUNI: $36,500 over 3y, 7.2% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC: $28,800 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetSafe City Commission: $25,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCRAZY8 MINISTRIES INC: $23,500 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetCASA of Johnson County Inc: $22,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetPREGNANCY RESOURCES & MEDICAL CLINIC OF NORTH TX: $20,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetCommunity Healthcare of Texas: $5,500 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Community Foundation …Communities Foundatio…Mustang FoundationNetwork for GoodFidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Community Foundation of North Texas (TaxTX17× affinity6 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Mustang Foundation · Network for Good · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Health Huguley Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Texas Health Huguley Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 15 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Texas Health Huguley’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