· Public charity
The Gvtc Foundation Inc
To empower local communities by generating and distributing funds to enrich, maintain, and expand programs needed to support charitable activities, non-profit organizations and educational pursuits.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 29 grants below total $280,266 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $557,231 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $276,965 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k19 grants · $130k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $151k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CANINE CLASSMATES | $20,000 |
| CONNECTIONS INDIVIDUAL AND FAMILY SERVICES INC | $20,000 |
| HILL COUNTRY DAILY BREAD MINISTRIES | $17,500 |
| RECOVERYWERKS | $17,500 |
| HILL COUNTRY FAMILY SERVICES | $15,000 |
| CASA OF CENTRAL TEXAS INC | $15,000 |
| BULVERDE SENIOR CENTER | $12,000 |
| SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK | $12,000 |
| RAINBOW SENIOR CENTER | $11,500 |
| HOPE HOSPICE | $10,000 |
| COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS | $9,500 |
| BULVERDE FOOD PANTRY INC | $7,500 |
| NEW BRAUNFELS CHRISTIAN MINISTRIES | $7,500 |
| FAMILY PROMISE OF GREATER NEW BRAUNFELS | $7,500 |
| CRRC OF CANYON LAKE | $7,500 |
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 (FY17–24, $360k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 24% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +57% since the first grant, against +47% for the ones you funded once.
40 repeat relationships — 22 still active in FY2024, 18 since wound down; 7 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, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $57k 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
- SASAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK8× · 2017–2024 · $180k · revenue +60%
- BEBoerne Education Foundation6× · 2017–2024 · $115k · revenue +46%
- CICOMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF SOUTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC8× · 2017–2024 · $102k · revenue +89%
Funded once
- AHALAMO HEIGHTS UNITED METHODIST CHURCHone grant, 2018 · $11k
- LSLONE STAR PARKINSON SOCIETYgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $11k · revenue +198%
- CPCOMAL PUBLIC SCHOOL FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +5%
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 protect and enhance the quality of life for abused and neglected children in Medina, Real and Uvalde Counties of Texas.
To provide services for the protection of abused and neglected children that are in the custody of the State of Texas.
To advocate for and provide services to children and families when there are allegations of abuse and neglect throughout the investigation,prosecution, treatment, and prevention of child abuse, and to reduce the trauma to childrent with…
Sunny Glen Childrens Home, Inc. cares for children in need. Our care will be competent, compassionate and professional. We will help every child achieve their greatest potential-physically, emotionally, spiritually and academically.
Fort Bend County Child Advocates, Inc. provides a voice, heals the hurt and breaks the cycle of abuse and neglect for children in Fort Bend County.
The mission of the Good Samaritan Center is to provide a safe, Christ- Centered environment that gives our patients quality, coordinated and affordable healthcare.
Provide support to foster children and at risk families in Comal County Texas. Provide emergency support to victims of child abuse.
Child Advocacy
Lone Star CASA elevates the voices of children in Kaufman and Rockwall County who have experienced abuse and neglect by providing trained volunteer advocates to work alongside children and families so they can achieve safety and stability…
Promote hispanic business in brazoria county, texas by increasing opportunities, networking and providing access to resources.
CASA of Williamson County, TX exists to empower community volunteers to advocate for children who have experienced abuse or neglect to find loving, safe, and permanent homes.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Big Brothers Big Sisters of South Texas Inc and the most unlike its peers is Spring Branch Tennis Association. 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 22 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
65 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. 65 of the 74 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 SAN ANTONIO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds Boerne Education Foundation ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF SOUTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds RAINBOW SENIOR CENTER ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY DAILY BREAD ↗
- Who funds CASA of Central Texas Inc ↗
- Who funds KENDALL COUNTY WOMEN'S SHELTER ↗
- Who funds STEPS FOR LIFE ↗
- Who funds BULVERDE SENIOR CENTER ↗
- Who funds CANINE CLASSMATES ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY PREGNANCY CARE CENTER ↗
- Who funds CRRC OF CANYON LAKE INC ↗
- Who funds COMAL COUNTY JR LIVESTOCK ↗
- Who funds RECOVERYWERKS ↗
- Who funds NEW BRAUNFELS CHRISTIAN MINISTRIES ↗
- Who funds ACACIA MEDICAL MISSION ↗
- Who funds BULVERDE FOOD PANTRY INC ↗
- Who funds SJRC TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY CASA INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILY PROMISE OF GREATER NEW BRAUNFELS ↗
- Who funds BLESSINGS IN A BACKPACK INC ↗
- Who funds Bulverde Spring Branch Emergency Services ↗
- Who funds COMAL COUNTY FAMILY VIOLENCE SHELTER ↗
- Who funds HOPE HOSPICE ↗
- Who funds CONNECTIONS INDIVIDUAL AND FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds DAY 1 BAGS ↗
- Who funds Boerne Volunteer Fire Department ↗
- Who funds GLORIA DEO ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds ANY BABY CAN OF SAN ANTONIO INC ↗
- Who funds HIS CENTRE ↗
- Who funds RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF SAN ANTONIO INC ↗
- Who funds BULVERDE SPRING BRANCH PREGNANCY CARE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds KENDALL COUNTY JUNIOR LIVESTOCK ASSOCIAT ↗
- Who funds BULVERDE-SPRING BRANCH AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ↗
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: McKenna Foundation · San Antonio Area Foundation · Harvey E Najim Charitable Foundation · United Way of Comal County · Perry & Ruby Stevens Charitable Foundation · New Braunfels Area Community Foundation · John L Santikos Charitable Foundation · Carl C Anderson Sr and Marie Jo Anderson Charitable Foundation · San Antonio Food Bank · St Luke's Lutheran Health Ministries Inc · Faye L & William L Cowden Charitable Foundation · The Community Foundation of the Texas Hill Country 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 Gvtc Foundation Inc 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.