Skip to content

· Public charity

The Texas Golf Association

To promote the playing and advancement of the royal and ancient game of golf in texas.

$300k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$40k
Largest
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.

Recreation & Sports$609kEducation$121kPublic Benefit$9k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 5 grants below total $109,480, the rows itemized in this filing. The $300,265 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $190,785 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 $10k2 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $92k
$15,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$6.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TEXAS GOLF HALL OF FAME AND MUSEUM$40,000
UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION$36,500
MUNICIPAL GOLF ASSOCIATION - SA$15,000
CITY OF DEER PARK$9,480
NORTH TEXAS JUNIOR GOLF & EDUCATION FOUNDATION$8,500
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 92% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%THE SPIRIT GOLF ASSOCIATION: $28k → 9%THE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $164k → 14%MUNICIPAL GOLF ASSOCIATION - SA: $15k → 16%TEXAS GOLF HALL OF FAME AND MUSEUM: $40k → 16%SPIRIT GOLF ASSOCIATION: $12k → 9%THE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $124k → 14%TEXAS GOLF HALL OF FAME AND MUSEUM: $30k → 16%THE SPIRIT GOLF ASSOCIATION: $8k → 9%THE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $104k → 14%CITY OF DEER PARK: $9k → 16%THE SPIRIT GOLF ASSOCIATION: $8k → 9%NORTH TEXAS JUNIOR GOLF & EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $61k → 14%THE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $24k → 14%THE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $16k → 14%NORTH TEXAS JUNIOR GOLF & EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $14k → 14%NORTH TEXAS JUNIOR GOLF & EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $11k → 14%NORTH TEXAS JUNIOR GOLF & EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $11k → 14%NORTH TEXAS JUNIOR GOLF & EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $9k → 14%NORTH TEXAS JUNIOR GOLF & EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $9k → 14%NORTH TEXAS JUNIOR GOLF & EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $8k → 14%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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$678k · 4 repeat orgs$61k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +86% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

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

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
3

Total granted

$678k
$61k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+86%
0%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 44% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $61k 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
Recreation & SportsEducationArts & CultureOther
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

  • TT
    THE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION
    5× · 2019–2023 · $432k · revenue +51%
  • TG
    TEXAS GOLF HALL OF FAME & MUSEUM
    2× · 2023–2024 · $70k · revenue +95%
  • TS
    The Spirit Golf Association
    4× · 2017–2021 · $55k · revenue +86%

Funded once

  • US
    UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2024 · $37k · revenue 0%
  • MG
    MUNICIPAL GOLF ASSOCIATION - SA
    one grant, 2024 · $15k · revenue +20%
  • CO
    CITY OF DEER PARK TEXAS SENIOR CITIZENS FOUNDATION TRUST
    one grant, 2024 · $9k · revenue -14%
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
Northern Texas Pga Foundation

Junior golf promotion

Recreation & Sports
2
Harmon Family Foundation (Fka the Claude Harmon Foundation)
—
3
Amateur Golf Alliance

Our mission is to provide the championship with its playability and unique hole designs in the dfw area. we also offer the players golf courses to support and promote amateur golfers with more opportunities to compete at national and…

Recreation & Sports
4
The Texas Golf Association

To promote the playing and advancement of the royal and ancient game of golf in texas.

—
5
Northern Texas Section Pga of America Inc

Golf promotion

—
6
Southern Texas Professional Golfers Association Foundation

To introduce and provide youth in south texas broad opportunities to experience the game of golf, develop their talent as players and themselves as individuals and promote scholarship benefits to as many qualified candidates as possible.…

Recreation & Sports
7
Professional Golfers Assoc of America Southern Texas Section

To promote the enjoyment and involvement in the game of golf and to contribute to the growth of the golf professional and the golf industry. the southern texas section will accomplish this mission by enhancing the skills of golf…

—
8
The World Senior Golf Federation Inc
Recreation & Sports
9
Heb Tournament of Champions Charitable Trust
Philanthropy
10
Montana State Golf Association

The montana state golf association (msga) is the allied golf association governing amateur golf in montana. the msga administers the world handicap system for clubs in montana and provides course rating evaluations and handicap review for…

Recreation & Sports
11
Calpine Foundation
Philanthropy
12
Hannon Cup Association

The Hannon Cup Association is dedicated to organizing and promoting the growth of golf in Austin through scholarships following the values and legacy of Coach Hannon by raising funds to provide educational financial assistance to…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Texas Golf Association Foundation; the most unlike its peers is City of Deer Park Texas Senior Citizens Foundation Trust. 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

7 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
4/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $432,000 · OtherTHE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION+1 more: $9,480 · OtherNORTH TEXAS JR GOLF AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $120,500 · EducationNORTH TEXAS JR GOL…The Spirit Golf Association: $55,000 · Recreation & SportsThe Spirit Golf …UNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION: $36,500 · Recreation & SportsUNITED STATES GO…MUNICIPAL GOLF ASSOCIATION - SA: $15,000 · Recreation & SportsMUNICIPAL GOLF A…TEXAS GOLF HALL OF FAME & MUSEUM (AUDIT): $70,000 · Arts & CultureTEXAS GOLF…
Other$441,480Education$120,500Recreation & Sports$106,500Arts & Culture$70,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE TEXAS GOLF ASSOCIATION FOUNDATION: $432,000 over 5y, 17% of budgetNORTH TEXAS JR GOLF AND EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $120,500 over 7y, 3.6% of budgetTEXAS GOLF HALL OF FAME & MUSEUM (AUDIT): $70,000 over 2y, 7.7% of budgetThe Spirit Golf Association: $55,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetUNITED STATES GOLF ASSOCIATION: $36,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMUNICIPAL GOLF ASSOCIATION - SA: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Texas Golf Association funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Texas Golf Association. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 7 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 Golf Association’s filings →

    More from the funding graph