· Private foundation
The Cash Family Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k12 grants · $42k
- $10k–50k15 grants · $303k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $422k
- $250k+1 grant · $350k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RANCH LIFE LEARNING CENTERNRHC | $350,000 |
| AMERICA FIRST POLICY INSTITUTE | $120,009 |
| TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION | $105,462 |
| AMERICA FIRST POLICY INSTITUTE | $98,810 |
| TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION | $97,852 |
| RANCHING HERITAGE ASSOCIATION | $40,758 |
| AMERICAN JUNIOR GOLF ASSOCIATION | $35,000 |
| AMERICA FIRST POLICY INSTITUTE | $29,991 |
| SNOWY PINES PAWS FOR PURPOSE | $27,000 |
| TEXAS RANGER ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| SCIENCE SPECTRUM | $20,250 |
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| COVENANT HEALTH FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| ANNA'S HOUSE FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
| TEXAS HOME SCHOOL COALITION | $15,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY22–24, $76k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein 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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +87% since the first grant, against +31% for the ones you funded once.
25 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $105k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- TTTEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC5× · 2020–2024 · $2.2M · revenue +14%
- SCSOUTHCREST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC3× · 2020–2022 · $655k · revenue +20%
- AFAMERICA FIRST POLICY INSTITUTE INC2× · 2023–2024 · $399k · revenue +87%
Funded once
- TTTEXAS TECH EQUESTRIAN CENTERone grant, 2023 · $70k
- LSLUBBOCK SPORTSMAN'S CLUB INCone grant, 2021 · $65k · revenue -100%
- SPSAFE PLACE LUBBOCKone grant, 2022 · $35k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
To support texas land trusts and promote land conservation efforts in texas. host texas land conservation conference to educate conservation related professionals and volunteers from across the state.
Texas Conservative Coalition Research Institute (TCCRI) is committed to shaping public policy through a principled approach to state government. TCCRI rests on four core principles of Limited Government, Individual Liberties, Free…
To support and further the mission of texas state university through the acceptance and investment of gifts established as endowments benefiting the students, faculty and staff.
To complement the state of texas' support of the colleges by providing financial support for new and ongoing projects and activities in the areas of research, education and community service.
Defending principles that make this state exceptional. we are taking on public officials who advocate policies contrary to what makes texas, texas. we are here to safeguard individual liberties, limited government and the bedrock of our…
To support the university of texas system
To advance and sustain interests in the state of Texas with an emphasis on increasing transparency and improving transparency in education within Texas.
The foundation was established to provide a permanent endowment fund or funds for the purpose of encouraging members of the public to make gifts to the junior league of lubbock, inc. and for providing a more secure and permanent means of…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Texas Tech Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Ag Women Connect Foundation. 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.
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 35 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) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
28 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 28 of the 55 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds TEXAS TECH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHCREST CHRISTIAN SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICA FIRST POLICY INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds Ranching Heritage Association ↗
- Who funds TEXAS RANGER ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds American Junior Golf Association Inc ↗
- Who funds OKLAHOMA CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF WEST TEXAS ↗
- Who funds POST STAMPEDE INC ↗
- Who funds BIENVENIDO USA ↗
- Who funds LUBBOCK SPORTSMAN'S CLUB INC ↗
- Who funds THE ANNA'S HOUSE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LUBBOCK COUNTY EXPO CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds SNOWY PINES PAWS FOR PURPOSE ↗
- Who funds SCIENCE SPECTRUM INC ↗
- Who funds PARKS AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION OF TEXAS ↗
- Who funds COVENANT HEALTH SYSTEM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AG WOMEN CONNECT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TEXAS HOME SCHOOL COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds BEACON STATE FUND ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR HEARING AND SPEECH ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CORNERSTONE INSTITUTE INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Ch Foundation Inc · Ershel Franklin Charitable Trust · Helen Jones Foundation Inc · Diekemper Family Foundation Inc · Lubbock South Plains Lions Club · Terry & Kelly Crofoot Foundation · Community Foundation of West Texas · Texas Instruments Foundation · Servant Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc
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 organization The Cash Family 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.
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 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.