Skip to content

· Public charity

United Way of Lamar County

The mission of the UNITED WAY OF LAMAR COUNTY is to effectively generate, organize, and distribute resources to help meet our communities' evolving human needs focusing on the areas of education,income and health.

$791k
Granted FY2025still arriving
19
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$78k
Largest
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Human Services$742kYouth Development$445kHealth$309kCrime & Legal$261kFood & Nutrition$214kEmployment$189kHousing & Shelter$182kPublic Safety & Disaster$129kOther$0
02FY2025 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 19 grants below total $495,025, the rows itemized in this filing. The $790,530 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $295,505 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $232k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $245k
$20,068
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF RED RIVER VALL$77,520
RRV DOWN SYNDROME SOCIETY$60,250
LAMAR COUNTY FOOD PANTRY$53,867
THE SALVATION ARMY$52,915
THE KING'S DAUGHTERS$44,504
CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER$27,100
LAMAR COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARD$24,000
AMERICAN RED CROSS$22,008
CASA FOR KIDS$20,504
PARIS HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$20,068
PARIS COMMUNITY THEATRE$19,020
AARON PARKER AFTERSCHOOL PROGRAM$13,725
UNDER 5000 AND ACCRUAL DIFFERENCE$11,008
LAMAR COUNTY LITERACY COUNCIL$10,258
Individual grant recipient$10,008
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 (FY19–25, $266k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%LAMAR COUNTY HUMAN RESOURCES: $48k → 15%LAMAR COUNTY HUMAN RESOURCES: $48k → 15%LAMAR COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARD: $28k → 15%SAFE-T SHELTER: $27k → 15%LAMAR COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARD: $26k → 15%LAMAR COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARD: $24k → 15%LAMAR COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARD: $23k → 15%LAMAR COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARD: $23k → 15%SAFE-T SHELTER: $20k → 15%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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.4M · 32 repeat orgs$60k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +27% since the first grant, against -93% for those funded once.

32 repeat relationships: 17 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

32
3

Total granted

$3.4M
$41k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%
-93%

Still filing today

38%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $19k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesFood & NutritionPublic BenefitHealthCrime & LegalCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • BG
    Boys & Girls Club of the Red River Valle y
    7× · 2019–2025 · $522k · revenue +27%
  • KD
    KING'S DAUGHTERS AND KING'S SONS - FIRST CIRCLE
    7× · 2019–2025 · $313k · revenue +76%
  • LC
    LAMAR COUNTY FOOD PANTRY INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $268k · revenue +111%

Funded once

  • O5
    OTHERS 5000 OR LESS
    one grant, 2020 · $25k
  • OL
    OTHERS LESS THAN 5000
    one grant, 2019 · $9k
  • DD
    DYLANS DRIVERS
    one grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue -93%
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
Dart (Domestic Abuse Resistance Team)

To provide counseling, legal advocacy, and shelter needs to victims of domestic violence in the parishes of lincoln, bienville, union, claiborne, jackson, grant, and winn.

Human Services
2
Paris Community Theater

Paris Community Theatre is dedicated to producing high-quality entertainment that engages, inspires, educates, and transforms. Through the arts, we provide cultural enrichment, creative development, and opportunities for self-discovery. We…

Arts & Culture
3
Lasalle County Childrens Advocacy Center

Advocacy and care of physically and sexually abused children in lasalle county. we work with the court system in determining the best placement for children.

Crime & Legal
4
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Milam County
—
5
Eastland County Crisis Center Inc

To provide services designed to meet the physical, social, and emotional needs of domestic violence and sexual assault victims by providing for immediate, short, and long-term needs.

Human Services
6
Lamar County Humane Association

The prevention of suffering, neglect, abuse and cruelty to animals and the extension of humane education through spay and neuter programs and educational platforms.

Animals
7
Texas Foster Care & Adoption Serv

A state of texas licensed foster care and adoption agency that identifies and provides approved healing foster homes for children.

Human Services
8
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Hidalgo Count

To provide services for the protection of abused and neglected children that are in the custody of the State of Texas.

Civil Rights
9
Delta Childrens Advocacy Center

Delta Childrens Advocacy Centers mission is to respond to child abuse in the Mississippi Delta by serving and nurturing children and non-offending caregivers through a trauma-informed multidisciplinary approach.

Crime & Legal
10
Talladega County Child Advocacy Center Inc

Interview facility for child abuse victims.

Human Services
11
Homeless Outreach Mitigation and Emergency Center

to reach functional zero homelessness in Hays County through outreach case management direct aid and emergency response while maintaining the dignity of the people we serve

Human Services
12
The Lullaby House

The Lullaby House missionis ot strengthen families by providing programs and services to teenage parents and familites in need which will inspire and promote generational change.

Youth Development
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Childrens Center Inc Dba Childrens Advocacy Center of Paris; the most unlike its peers is Dylans Drivers. 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

15 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. 15 of the 37 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/15
Grantees still filing
8/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Boys & Girls Club of the Red River Valle y: $522,053 · OtherBoys & Girls Club of the Red River Valle yKING'S DAUGHTERS AND KING'S SONS - FIRST CIRCLE: $312,674 · OtherKING'S DAUGHTERS AND KING'S SONS - FIRST CIRCLERRV DOWN SYNDROME SOCIETY: $234,110 · OtherRRV DOWN SYNDROME SOCIETYUNDER 5000 AND ACCRUAL DIFFERENCE: $174,024 · OtherUNDER 5000 AND ACCRUAL DIFFERENCECHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER: $155,151 · OtherCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTERTHE SALVATION ARMY: $149,087 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMYAMERICAN RED CROSS: $105,017 · OtherNEW HOPE CENTER OF PARIS: $104,166 · OtherPARIS HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $101,600 · OtherLAMAR COUNTY HR COUNCIL: $93,004 · Other+18 more: $569,280 · Other+18 moreLAMAR COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARD INC: $179,513 · Human ServicesLAMAR COUN…HUMAN RESOURCES COUNCIL INC: $96,000 · Human ServicesHUMAN RESO…SHELTER AGENCIES FOR FAMILIES IN EAST TEXAS: $46,500 · Human ServicesSHELTER AG…LAMAR COUNTY FOOD PANTRY INC: $268,106 · Food & NutritionCASA For Kids Inc: $103,261 · Civil RightsARK-TEX COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS: $101,010 · Public BenefitRed River Valley Down Syndrome Society: $60,000 · HealthTHE CHILDRENS CENTER INC DBA CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER OF PARIS: $50,000 · Crime & LegalGREATER PARIS DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · Community Improvement
Other$2,520,166Human Services$322,013Food & Nutrition$268,106Civil Rights$103,261Public Benefit$101,010Health$60,000Crime & Legal$50,000Community Improvement$20,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBoys & Girls Club of the Red River Valle y: $522,053 over 7y, 20% of budgetKING'S DAUGHTERS AND KING'S SONS - FIRST CIRCLE: $312,674 over 7y, 21% of budgetLAMAR COUNTY FOOD PANTRY INC: $268,106 over 7y, 9.3% of budgetLAMAR COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARD INC: $179,513 over 7y, 31% of budgetNEW HOPE CENTER OF PARIS: $104,166 over 2y, 14% of budgetCASA For Kids Inc: $103,261 over 5y, 4.3% of budgetARK-TEX COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS: $101,010 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHUMAN RESOURCES COUNCIL INC: $96,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetRed River Valley Down Syndrome Society: $60,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetTHE CHILDRENS CENTER INC DBA CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER OF PARIS: $50,000 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetSHELTER AGENCIES FOR FAMILIES IN EAST TEXAS: $46,500 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetPARISLAMAR COUNTY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $37,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetPARIS CHRISTIAN CENTER INC: $21,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetGREATER PARIS DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetDYLANS DRIVERS: $7,500 over 1y, 12% 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 Boys & Girls Club of the Red River Valle y ↗
  • Who funds KING'S DAUGHTERS AND KING'S SONS - FIRST CIRCLE ↗
  • Who funds LAMAR COUNTY FOOD PANTRY INC ↗
  • Who funds LAMAR COUNTY CHILD WELFARE BOARD INC ↗
  • Who funds NEW HOPE CENTER OF PARIS ↗
  • Who funds CASA For Kids Inc ↗
  • Who funds ARK-TEX COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS ↗
  • Who funds HUMAN RESOURCES COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds Red River Valley Down Syndrome Society ↗
  • Who funds THE CHILDRENS CENTER INC DBA CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER OF PARIS ↗
  • Who funds SHELTER AGENCIES FOR FAMILIES IN EAST TEXAS ↗
  • Who funds PARISLAMAR COUNTY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC ↗
  • Who funds PARIS CHRISTIAN CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds GREATER PARIS DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds DYLANS DRIVERS ↗

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.

Ram FoundationTX26.3× affinity10 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ram Foundation · St Joseph's Community Foundation · The Roy and Skeeter Davis Family Foundation · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 United Way of Lamar County funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from United Way of Lamar County. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 37 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on United Way of Lamar County’s filings →

    More from the funding graph