How much did THE 1687 FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 83% of THE 1687 FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2019

agapeliving waterwater ministry

2020

chartiblenorthhospicefood bankwest

2021

adamschartiblehospiceministryyoung capernaumcross plainsfood bank

2022

caremgmtchildren's medicalptolivestockcross plainsaustin

2024

scholarshipangeloinvend jarcheerarntech agreement

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 117 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k35 grants · $138k
$10k–50k57 grants · $1.1M
$50k–250k22 grants · $2.0M
$250k+3 grants · $1.4M

$14,470

Median grant

States reached

$202M

Total assets

Largest grants

TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION - AGREEMENT 2024$580,000
TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION - AGREEMENT GRANT$500,000
TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC - GRANT$350,000
HEARTBEAT INTERNATIONAL - GRANT$240,000
LIFELINE CHILDREN'S SERVICES - GRANT$180,563
CAMP ABLE OF BUFFALO GAP - ABILENE GIVES FUNDRAISER$150,495
OPEN DOOR - 2024 MOBILE UNIT EXPENSES$123,063
ELAM MINISTRIES - GRANT$120,000
BILLY GRAHAM EVANGELISTIC ASSO - DONATION- SAMARITANS PURSE$100,000
MERCY GATE MINISTRIES-MINDY - GRANT$100,000
OLDEN VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMEN - GRANT$100,000
TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC - THE 1687 FOUNDATION SCHOLARSHIP$100,000
TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION - GRANT$100,000
CENTER FOR ASD - MATCHING GRANT$75,000
WMK LLC - VAN DONATION FOR HEATHER$69,380

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY19–22, $406k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

45%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$6.0M · 61 repeat orgs$7.2M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +71% since the first grant, against +64% for the ones you funded once.

61 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 60 since wound down; 115 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$6.0M

$2.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+71%

+64%

Still filing today

39%

14%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4.7M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

Human ServicesEducationReligionAnimalsPhilanthropyArts & CultureOther

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

EC
EASTLAND COUNTY OPEN DOOR
5× · 2018–2022 · $571k · revenue +156% · 28% of their budget
LC
LIFELINE CHILDREN'S SERVICES
5× · 2018–2022 · $521k · revenue +159%
CP
CHASE'S PLACE
4× · 2018–2022 · $255k · revenue +16%

Funded once

TT
TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION-VEGETATION MONITORING & MGMT
one grant, 2022 · $370k
TT
TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION-PURPLE MARTIN RESEARCH
one grant, 2022 · $146k
RM
RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES-OREGON
one grant, 2022 · $100k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Christian Homes of Abilene Inc

To change lives and build Christian families through maternity, foster, and adoption services.

Human Services

Tarrant Area Food Bank

Tarrant area food bank empowers communities to alleviate hunger and improve health.

—

Pregnancy Resources of Abilene Inc

Pregnancy Resources' mission is to inspire hope and unconditionally love everyone we serve by empowering them to thrive through compassionate support and positive solutions.

Civil Rights

Texans Care for Children Inc

Texas Care for Children shapes public policies and brings Texans together to make children a statewide priority. We work so kids can have what they need to be healthy, secure, and thriving and so every Texan can have the best start to life.

Crime & Legal

North Texas Christian Foundation

As the North Texas affiliate of the National Christian Foundation (NCF), our mission is to serve and encourage givers to grow as faithful stewards who give wisely to further the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Philanthropy

Texas Girls and Boys Ranch

Sharing jesus, healing hearts, transforming lives.

Human Services

Raise Texas

RAISE Texas advances equitable policies and programs that foster financial security and economic mobility for low- and moderate-income Texans. We equip, innovate and advocate to reduce disparities, remove barriers and build opportunities…

Human Services

Lubbock Family Outreach Center Inc

The Family Guidance & Outreach Center of Lubbock is dedicated to the prevention of child abuse and neglect and supporting, mentoring, and educating parents.

Human Services

Texprotects-the Texas Association for

TexProtects advances public policy and local implementation to strenghten families to prevent child abuse and neglect.

Youth Development

Tip of Texas Family Outreach Inc

To strengthen families through parenting classes educational programs, youth programs and referral services for the prevention of child abuse and neglect.

—

Texas Center for Child and Family

To strengthen the lives of children and families.

Human Services

Feeding Texas

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

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Centers for Children and Families Inc and the most unlike its peers is Community Foundation of Abilene. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 24 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

2%1/41

the rest of the field

13%

17,175/136,763

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

38 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

37/38

Grantees still filing

35/38

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$11,026,088Religion$696,800Education$641,500Human Services$468,400Recreation & Sports$100,000Arts & Culture$100,000Youth Development$97,125

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.

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.

Helen Greathouse Charitable TrustNV20.2× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Helen Greathouse Charitable Trust · Abell-Hanger Foundation · Permian Basin Area Foundation · United Way of Midland Inc · Paul and Katherine Morrow Family · Beal Foundation · Pevehouse Family Foundation · The Henry Foundation · James a Buddy Davidson · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · The Fasken Foundation · Warren Charitable Foundation

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 organisation THE 1687 FOUNDATION 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: ENCOURAGE ONE ANOTHER.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~9 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 4 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up +68% since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 821329690 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on ENCOURAGE ONE ANOTHER, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 9 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 39% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to The 1687 Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The 1687 Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

THE 1687 FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

38 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The 1687 Foundation?

More from the funding graph

THE 1687 FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

38 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to The 1687 Foundation?

More from the funding graph