Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Aughinbaugh Family Charitable Foundation Inc

$35k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$23k
Largest
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Religion$126kHousing & Shelter$30kEducation$27kArts & Culture$19kRecreation & Sports$5kYouth Development$5kHuman Services$2kHealth$250Other$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k11 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $23k
$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$100
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$23,150
Individual grant recipient$5,000
TEXAS HISTORICAL FOUNDATION$2,500
GILLESPIE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY$1,000
GOOD SHEPARD CHURCH$1,000
FRIENDS OF CE INC$1,000
THE GOODFELLOW FUND$1,000
FORT WORTH COUNTRY DAY$320
AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION$200
HISTORIC FORT WORTH$100
WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT$50
AUSTIN STREET SHELTER$25
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 (FY21–25, $550) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT: $50 → 14%LENA POPE HOME INC: $500 → 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.
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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$214k · 11 repeat orgs$12k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
12

Total granted

$214k
$9k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+4%

Still filing today

45%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureHealthHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterEducationYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • CO
    CHURCH OF THE INCARNATION
    4× · 2020–2023 · $81k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    2× · 2024–2025 · $43k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    4× · 2022–2025 · $31k

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $5k
  • GO
    GUARDIANS OF THE LEGACY - PIONEER MUSEUM
    one grant, 2024 · $1k
  • BL
    BSA LONGHORN COUNCIL
    one grant, 2022 · $1k
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
Center for 20TH Century Texas Studies
—
2
Texas Christian University

Texas christian university is an institution of higher education which includes nine major academic units: liberal arts, science and engineering, business, education, fine arts, communication, honors, nursing and health sciences, and the…

Education
3
Baylor Research Institute

To improve the care and well being of our community, nationally and internationally, through innovative clinically relevant research that is consistent with the mission, vision and values of Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH).

Health
4
Children's Health System of Texas

With more than 1 million patient visits each year, Children's Health is North Texas' leading pediatric health system and among the largest in the nation. For more than a century, our mission has been clear: make life better for children.…

Health
5
Baylor All Saints Medical Center

Founded as a Christian ministry of healing, Baylor Scott & White Health (BSWH) promotes the well-being of all individuals, families and communities.

Health
6
Texas Flying Legends Museum
—
7
Witte Museum

The witte museum inspires people to shape the future of texas through transformative and relevant experiences in nature, science and culture.

Arts & Culture
8
Tex-E Inc
Education
9
Fort Worth Museum of Science and History

Dedicated to lifelong learning and anchored by our rich collections, the fort worth museum of science and history engages our diverse community through creative, vibrant programs and exhibits interpreting science and the stores of texas…

Arts & Culture
10
Kimbell Art Foundation
Arts & Culture
11
Texas Prairieland Foundation
Philanthropy
12
North Fort Worth Historical Society

Promote historic north fort worth area.

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Fort Worth Junior Golf Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Friends of C E 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

11 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. 11 of the 28 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)
11/11
Grantees still filing
3/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHURCH OF THE INCARNATION: $81,000 · OtherCHURCH OF THE INCARNATIONIndividual grant recipient: $43,150 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $30,936 · OtherIndividual grant recipientTEXAS HISTORICAL FOUNDATION: $15,169 · OtherTEXAS HISTORICAL FOUNDATION+14 more: $13,895 · Other+14 moreTHE PRESBYTERIAN NIGHT SHELTER OF TARRANT COUNTY: $30,000 · Housing & ShelterTHE PRESBYTERIA…Friends of C E Inc: $7,000 · EducationGILLESPIE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC: $3,000 · Arts & CultureHistoric Fort Worth Inc: $200 · Arts & CultureLENA POPE HOME INC: $500 · Human ServicesWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $50 · Human ServicesFORT WORTH STOCK SHOW SYNDICATE: $541 · Youth DevelopmentAmerican Heart Association Inc: $200 · HealthRush University Medical Center: $50 · HealthFORT WORTH JUNIOR GOLF FOUNDATION INC: $100 · Recreation & Sports
Other$184,150Housing & Shelter$30,000Education$7,000Arts & Culture$3,200Human Services$550Youth Development$541Health$250Recreation & Sports$100

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE PRESBYTERIAN NIGHT SHELTER OF TARRANT COUNTY: $30,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTEXAS HISTORICAL FOUNDATION: $15,169 over 6y, 1.7% of budgetFriends of C E Inc: $7,000 over 6y, 20% of budgetGILLESPIE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetFORT WORTH STOCK SHOW SYNDICATE: $541 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLENA POPE HOME INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHistoric Fort Worth Inc: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFORT WORTH JUNIOR GOLF FOUNDATION INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRush University Medical Center: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $50 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.

  • Who funds THE PRESBYTERIAN NIGHT SHELTER OF TARRANT COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds TEXAS HISTORICAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Friends of C E Inc ↗
  • Who funds GILLESPIE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds FORT WORTH STOCK SHOW SYNDICATE ↗
  • Who funds LENA POPE HOME INC ↗
  • Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds Historic Fort Worth Inc ↗
  • Who funds FORT WORTH JUNIOR GOLF FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Rush University Medical Center ↗
  • Who funds WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

James and Dorothy Doss Foundation IncTX13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: James and Dorothy Doss Foundation Inc · Thomas M Helen McKee & John P Ryan Fo John P Ryan Foundation Inc · Community Foundation of North Texas (Tax · Communities Foundation of Texas Inc · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 The Aughinbaugh Family Charitable Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Aughinbaugh Family Charitable Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
3report 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 28 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Aughinbaugh Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph