Loading…
· Public charity
UNITED WAY OF RUSK COUNTY INC
Conducts an annual fundraising campaign in rusk county, texas then allocates the funds to publicly known qualified charitable organizations that serve the people of rusk county
$118k
Granted FY2023
8
Grants
1
Communities
$15k
Largest
01What you fund
0187% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2019–2023.
Health$44kFood & Nutrition$38kCrime & Legal$37kHousing & Shelter$32kHuman Services$27kCivil Rights$25kYouth Development$24kOther$34k
02FY2023 · 8 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2023
- Under $10k4 grants · $30k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $49k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$207k
Total assets
Largest grants
- RUSK-PANOLA CO CHILD ADVOCACY$15,000
- CROSSROADS FAMILY CARE$13,000
- HENDERSON FOOD PANTRY$11,000
- MEALS ON WHEELS$10,000
- SON SHINE LIGHTHOUSE MINISTRY$9,000
- BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB$7,500
- CHRISTIAN WOMEN'S JOB CORP$7,500
- RC CHILD WELFARE BOARD$6,000
02The need
03
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.
show:
Your human-services grants (FY19–19, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17% — the area typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
03Your edge
repeat funding
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.
95%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$248k · 8 repeat orgs$14k to everyone else
8 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2023, 0 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
8
2
Total granted
$248k
$14k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+32%
+34%
Still filing today
100%
50%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Human ServicesHealthFood & NutritionCrime & LegalHousing & ShelterCivil RightsOther
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
- CFCROSSROADS FAMILY CARE3× · 2019–2023 · $44k · revenue +63%
- HFHENDERSON FOOD PANTRY3× · 2019–2023 · $38k · revenue +46%
- RCRUSKPANOLA CHILDRENS ADVOCA3× · 2019–2023 · $37k · revenue +32%
Funded once
- WCWOMENS CENTER OF EAST TX INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue +34%
- RCRUSK COUNTY FRIENDS HELPINGone grant, 2019 · $6k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
04Your field
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.
1
Ruth's House of Hope
To help women and children in recovery from violence, oppression and homelessness in rice county. to provide affordable housing in a safe, supportive and healing environment as a transition into a new beginning.
Housing & Shelter
2
Robertson County Child Advocacy Cen
Effective prosecution of child abuses, providing therapy and education for the abused, and providing a safe haven for the abused.
Crime & Legal
3
Russell County Child Advocacy Ctr
The organization's purpose is to promote multi-agency cooperation for the benefit of child victims and non offending families. To provide support, referrals, advocate for child sensitive investigation and swift prosecution of offenders.
Crime & Legal
4
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
5
Women's Resource Center of Hancock County Inc
Provide mentoring and financial services to women
Human Services
6
Ruths House
Provide a community owned and operated shelter for a safe haven from domestic violence for women and their children in beaufort county, nc. provide counseling and guidance to allow these women to make decisions about their future.
Crime & Legal
7
Hutchinson County Crisis Center Inc
Hutchinson county crisis center is a community based nonprofit agency committed to ending the cycle of domestic violence and sexual assault by providing safe residence for victims and their children, legal advocacy, interactive listening,…
Crime & Legal
8
Robeson County Church and Community
To provide monetary emergency assistance, budget counseling, food assistance home repair, medical equipment/soft goods assistance, infant care assistance and home store voucher assistance.
Human Services
9
South Texas Pregnancy Care Center
Crisis pregnancy counseling.
Health
10
White County Children's Safety Cent
The mission of the children's advocacy center is to bring healing and give voice to avused children through assessment, treatment, education and community partnerships.
Human Services
11
Crisis Center of West Texas
Crisis center of west texas provides services to individuals affected by domestic and sexual violence. we provide shelter, counseling and advocacy to help build lives free from violence. we seek social change to end domestic and sexual…
—
12
Texas Battered Women's Center Inc
Provide care, assistance, and counseling for abused women. Provide food for needy families.
Human Services
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rusk County Childrens Advocacy Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Henderson Food Bank. 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
9 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Health$44,000Food & Nutrition$38,000Crime & Legal$37,000Other$34,000Housing & Shelter$32,000Human Services$27,000Civil Rights$25,000Youth Development$24,000
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 CROSSROADS FAMILY CARE ↗
- Who funds HENDERSON FOOD PANTRY ↗
- Who funds RUSKPANOLA CHILDRENS ADVOCA ↗
- Who funds SON SHINE LIGHTHOUSE MINISTRY ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN WOMENS JOB CORP ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB ↗
- Who funds RC CHILD WELFARE BOARD ↗
- Who funds WOMENS CENTER OF EAST TX 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.
East Texas Communities FoundationTX18× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: East Texas Communities Foundation · Henderson Memorial Hospital Foundation · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 organisation UNITED WAY OF RUSK COUNTY 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.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: HENDERSON FOOD PANTRY.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
insufficient risk
Limited financial data in public filings.
Track record & reputation
low risk
8 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 710887543 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on HENDERSON FOOD PANTRY, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 20% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to United Way of Rusk County Inc?
Find your warmest path to United Way of Rusk County Inc through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines