Skip to content

· Public charity

United Way of Navarro County Texas Inc

The united fund provides funds to charitable organizations that provide aid to the community and individuals in need.

$241k
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
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.

Human Services$959kCrime & Legal$236kRecreation & Sports$228kFood & Nutrition$186kPublic Safety & Disaster$137kYouth Development$115kCivil Rights$61kHousing & Shelter$45kOther$0
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $220k
$12,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$406k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PRESBYTERIAN HOMES AND SERVICES$40,000
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB$30,000
SALVATION ARMY$25,000
COMPASSION CORSICANA$25,000
YMCA AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM$23,000
AMERICAN RED CROSS$15,000
YMCA YOUTH SPORTS$12,000
MEALS ON WHEELS N CENTRAL TEXAS$10,000
YMCA-DAY CAMP$10,000
CAMP OF THE RISING SUN$10,000
WAREHOUSE OF LIVEING ARTS CENTER$10,000
CHRISTMAS IN ACTION$10,000
THE CHILD ADVOCACY CNTRCASA$9,000
CHILD ADVOCATES OF NAVARRO COUNTY$9,000
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 (FY17–24, $894k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 67% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Meals On Wheels N Central TX: $53k → 10%PRESBYTERIAN CHILDRENS HOME: $40k → 10%PRESBYTERIAN HOMES AND SERVICES: $40k → 16%Meals On Wheels N Central TX: $39k → 10%PRESBYTERIAN CHILDRENS HOME: $40k → 10%COMPASSION CORSICANA: $45k → 23%MEALS ON WHEELS N CENTRAL TEXAS: $39k → 10%PRESBYTERIAN CHILDRENS HOME: $35k → 10%MEALS ON WHEELS N CENTRAL TEXAS: $10k → 10%PRESBYTERIAN CHILDRENS HOME: $20k → 10%COMPASSION CORSICANA: $45k → 23%PRESBYTERIAN CHILDRENS HOME: $20k → 10%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $30k → 23%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $27k → 23%YMCA-AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM: $26k → 23%COMPASSION CORSICANA: $25k → 23%YMCA AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM: $23k → 23%YMCA-AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM: $23k → 23%YMCA-AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM: $22k → 23%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $20k → 23%YMCA-AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM: $20k → 23%FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION: $19k → 23%YMCA-AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM: $17k → 23%YMCA AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM: $17k → 23%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $15k → 23%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $15k → 23%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $15k → 23%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $15k → 23%YMCA YOUTH SPORTS: $12k → 23%YMCA-YOUTH SPORTS: $10k → 23%YMCA-DAY CAMP: $10k → 23%YMCA-YOUTH SPORTS: $10k → 23%YMCA-YOUTH SPORTS: $9k → 23%YMCA: $9k → 23%YMCA: $9k → 23%YMCA-DAY CAMP: $8k → 23%YMCA-DAY CAMP: $8k → 23%YMCA-DAY CAMP: $8k → 23%YMCA-YOUTH SPORTS: $8k → 23%YMCA-YOUTH SPORTS: $8k → 23%YMCA YOUTH SPORTS: $8k → 23%YMCA-DAY CAMP: $7k → 23%YMCA-MENTORING: $6k → 23%YMCA-DAY CAMP: $6k → 23%YMCA-DAY CAMP: $6k → 23%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.9M · 12 repeat orgs$122k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +46% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
3

Total granted

$1.9M
$87k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+13%

Still filing today

75%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $35k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’24
Human ServicesCrime & LegalRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • YM
    Young Mens Christian Association of Corsicana
    9× · 2017–2025 · $289k · revenue +211%
  • FS
    FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION DBA COMPASSION CORSICANA
    9× · 2017–2025 · $248k · revenue +378%
  • PC
    PRESBYTERIAN CHILDREN'S HOMES & SERVICES
    9× · 2017–2025 · $244k · revenue +71%

Funded once

  • HO
    HOUSE OF REFUGE
    one grant, 2019 · $45k
  • FAMILY ABUSE CENTER INC
    one grant, 2020 · $22k · revenue +13%
  • SA
    SALVATION ARMY
    one grant, 2019 · $20k
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
Guadalupe County Children's Advocacy Center

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…

Crime & Legal
2
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Milam County
—
3
Northeast Texas Casa Inc

To work to ensure children receive the needed services to overcome abuse and neglect.

Civil Rights
4
Northeast Texas Child Advocacy Center Inc

To bring hope and healing while working together to break the cycle of child abuse.

Human Services
5
Bluebonnet Childrens Center

To protect and enhance the quality of life for abused and neglected children in Medina, Real and Uvalde Counties of Texas.

Crime & Legal
6
Casa of Williamson County Texas

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.

Crime & Legal
7
Shelter Agencies for Families in East Texas

To provide shelter to abused families.

Human Services
8
Casa of Harrison County

To provide trained court appointed volunteers to serve as advocates for the best interests of abused and neglected children in harrison county texas

Youth Development
9
Ft Bend County Child Advocates Inc

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.

Civil Rights
10
Lone Star Casa Inc

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…

Civil Rights
11
Casa of South Texas Inc

Child Advocacy

Human Services
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Family Abuse Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Camp of the Rising Sun. 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

13 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. 13 of the 17 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Young Mens Christian Association of Corsicana: $289,000 · Human ServicesYoung Mens Christian Association of CorsicanaFAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION DBA COMPASSION CORSICANA: $247,710 · Human ServicesFAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION DBA COMPASSION CORSICANAPRESBYTERIAN CHILDREN'S HOMES & SERVICES: $243,500 · Human ServicesPRESBYTERIAN CHILDREN'S HOMES & SERVICESAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $137,000 · Human ServicesAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Bran…MEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC: $91,000 · Human ServicesMEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS INCCHRISTMAS IN APRIL-NAVARRO COUNTY INC: $86,000 · Human ServicesCHRISTMAS IN APRIL-NAVARRO COUNTY INC+1 more: $22,000 · Human ServicesSENIOR CONNECT: $143,000 · OtherSENIOR CONNECTBoys & Girls Club of Navarro County: $115,000 · OtherBoys & Girls Club of Navarro …NAVARRO COUNTY FOOD PANTRY: $95,000 · OtherNAVARRO COUNTY FOOD PANTRYPROLIFE OF NAVARRO COUNTY: $61,460 · OtherPROLIFE OF NAVARRO COUNTYHOUSE OF REFUGE: $45,000 · OtherHOUSE OF REFUGETHE SALVATION ARMY: $25,000 · OtherSALVATION ARMY: $20,000 · Other+1 more: $10,000 · OtherNavarro County Children's Advocacy Center Inc: $236,396 · Crime & LegalNavarro Count…CAMP OF THE RISING SUN: $110,500 · Recreation & Sports
Human Services$1,116,210Other$514,460Crime & Legal$236,396Recreation & Sports$110,500

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 budgetYoung Mens Christian Association of Corsicana: $289,000 over 9y, 3.9% of budgetFAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION DBA COMPASSION CORSICANA: $247,710 over 9y, 23% of budgetPRESBYTERIAN CHILDREN'S HOMES & SERVICES: $243,500 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetNavarro County Children's Advocacy Center Inc: $236,396 over 9y, 5.8% of budgetSENIOR CONNECT: $143,000 over 3y, 3.9% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $137,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetCAMP OF THE RISING SUN: $110,500 over 9y, 43% of budgetNAVARRO COUNTY FOOD PANTRY: $95,000 over 3y, 17% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC: $91,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetCHRISTMAS IN APRIL-NAVARRO COUNTY INC: $86,000 over 9y, 26% of budgetPROLIFE OF NAVARRO COUNTY: $61,460 over 3y, 7.0% of budgetFAMILY ABUSE CENTER INC: $22,000 over 1y, 1.0% 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 Young Mens Christian Association of Corsicana ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION DBA COMPASSION CORSICANA ↗
  • Who funds PRESBYTERIAN CHILDREN'S HOMES & SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds Navarro County Children's Advocacy Center Inc ↗
  • Who funds SENIOR CONNECT ↗
  • Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
  • Who funds Boys & Girls Club of Navarro County ↗
  • Who funds CAMP OF THE RISING SUN ↗
  • Who funds NAVARRO COUNTY FOOD PANTRY ↗
  • Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS INC ↗
  • Who funds CHRISTMAS IN APRIL-NAVARRO COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds PROLIFE OF NAVARRO COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY ABUSE CENTER 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.

Navarro Community FoundationTX15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Navarro Community 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 Navarro County Texas Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from United Way of Navarro County Texas Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s 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 · 0–30%
    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 17 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.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $266k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on United Way of Navarro County Texas’ filings →

    More from the funding graph