Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

United Way of the Concho Valley Inc

See schedule o the united way of the concho valley's mission is to increase the organized capacity of people to care for one another by attracting and engaging human, financial and creative resources.

$625k
Granted FY2025still arriving
13
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$94k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Health$1.5MHuman Services$1.1MYouth Development$1.0MCrime & Legal$612kHousing & Shelter$443kFood & Nutrition$285kCommunity Improvement$79kEducation$71kOther$0
02FY2025 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k8 grants · $279k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $341k
$46,469
Median grant
1
States reached
$3.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WEST TEXAS COUNSELING & GUIDANCE CENTER$94,131
CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF TGC INC$77,238
ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE COUNCIL$60,556
YMCA OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS$55,229
CONCHO VALLEY COMMUNITY ACTION ASSOCIATION$53,774
CONCHO VALLEY REGIONAL FOOD BANK OF TX$49,467
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF THE CONCHO VALLEY$46,469
OZONA COMMUNITY CENTER$40,669
SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER$35,641
ICD FAMILY SHELTER$31,299
GALILEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT$30,559
SAN ANGELO CLUBHOUSE$25,523
CONCHO VALLEY TURNING POINT$19,568
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 (FY17–25, $944k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YMCA OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS: $80k → 13%YMCA OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS: $77k → 13%YMCA OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS: $69k → 13%YMCA OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS: $69k → 13%YMCA OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS: $68k → 13%YMCA OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS: $66k → 13%SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $65k → 13%SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $56k → 13%YMCA OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS: $55k → 13%SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $55k → 13%SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $53k → 13%SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $52k → 13%SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $51k → 13%SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER: $36k → 13%LA ESPERANZA CLINIC INC: $50k → 13%LA ESPERANZA CLINIC INC: $43k → 13%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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.

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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$5.2M · 20 repeat orgs$46k to everyone else

20 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
1

Total granted

$5.2M
$26k

Still filing today

80%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’25
Human ServicesHealthCivil RightsYouth DevelopmentHousing & ShelterRecreation & SportsOther

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

  • WT
    WEST TEXAS COUNSELING AND GUIDANCE
    9× · 2017–2025 · $520k · revenue +203%
  • YM
    YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS
    9× · 2017–2025 · $483k · revenue +31%
  • AD
    ALCOHOL & DRUG ABUSE COUNCIL FOR THE CONCHO VALLEY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $450k · revenue +123%

Funded once

  • AL
    ADULT LITERACY COUNCIL
    one grant, 2019 · $26k

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
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
Sunny Glen Children's Home Inc

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.

Human Services
3
Childrens Advocacy Center of Van Zandt County Inc

The children's advocacy center of van zandt county is committed to ensuring quality services and support to those children impacted by abuse while also building a future where no child in van zandt county experiences abuse.

Human Services
4
Boys and Girls Club of Laredo Inc

To inspire and enable all young people, especially those from disadvantaged circumstances, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens.

5
South Texas Pregnancy Care Center

Crisis pregnancy counseling.

Health
6
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
7
Childrens Advocacy Center of Laredo-Web

The center is fully operational treatment facility involving child victims of physical and sexual abuse. Children affected by abuse were provided with therapy and professional guidance through the legal and counseling system which the…

Health
8
Casa of South Texas Inc

Child Advocacy

Human Services
9
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
10
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
11
How Center

The H.O.W. Center provides a safe and structured living environment for individuals recovering from alcoholism and addiction while they gain the skills they need to live independently and successfully.

12
Tu Casa Incorporated

To support healthy violence-free lives and relationships for all children and adults in the San Luis Valley by providing crisis intervention services advocacy and counseling for victims and survivors of domestic and sexual violence.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Concho Valley Home for Girls Inc and the most unlike its peers is Ozona Community Center. 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

18 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 18 of the 22 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/18
Grantees still filing
12/18
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

ALCOHOL & DRUG ABUSE COUNCIL FOR THE CONCHO VALLEY — $449,552 · OtherALCOHOL & DRUG ABUSE COUNCIL FOR THE CONCHO VALLEYBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE CONCHO VALLEY — $427,635 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE CONCHO VALLEYConcho Valley Regional Food Bank — $285,357 · OtherConcho Valley Regional Food BankCONCHO VALLEY HOME FOR GIRLS INC — $252,031 · OtherCONCHO VALLEY HOME FOR GIRLS INCINSTITUTE OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT INC — $225,151 · OtherINSTITUTE OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT INCBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF MENARD — $185,252 · OtherBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF MENARDTEXAS SOUTHWEST COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA — $171,816 · OtherTEXAS SOUTHWEST COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICAOZONA COMMUNITY CENTER — $144,192 · OtherOZONA COMMUNITY CENTERThe Salvation Army — $141,768 · OtherThe Salvation Army+3 more — $152,914 · Other+3 moreYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS — $483,425 · Human ServicesYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIA…SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER — $367,208 · Human ServicesSAN ANGELO EARLY CHI…LA ESPERANZA CLINIC INC — $93,140 · Human ServicesLA ESPERANZA CLINIC …CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF GREATER WEST TEXAS — $611,820 · Civil RightsCHILDREN'S AD…WEST TEXAS COUNSELING AND GUIDANCE — $519,575 · HealthWEST TEXAS …CONCHO VALLEY TURNING POINT — $19,568 · HealthGIRL SCOUTS OF CENTRAL TEXAS — $250,010 · Youth DevelopmentGALILEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP — $191,115 · Housing & ShelterSONRISAS THERAPEUTIC RIDING INC — $190,957 · Recreation & SportsTOM GREEN COUNTY ADULT LITERACY COUNCIL — $44,491 · Education
Other$2,435,668Human Services$943,773Civil Rights$611,820Health$539,143Youth Development$250,010Housing & Shelter$191,115Recreation & Sports$190,957Education$44,491

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF GREATER WEST TEXAS — $611,820 over 9y, 3.2% of budgetWEST TEXAS COUNSELING AND GUIDANCE — $519,575 over 9y, 2.8% of budgetYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS — $483,425 over 9y, 2.8% of budgetALCOHOL & DRUG ABUSE COUNCIL FOR THE CONCHO VALLEY — $449,552 over 9y, 3.7% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE CONCHO VALLEY — $427,635 over 9y, 18% of budgetSAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER — $367,208 over 9y, 5.9% of budgetConcho Valley Regional Food Bank — $285,357 over 9y, 5.4% of budgetCONCHO VALLEY HOME FOR GIRLS INC — $252,031 over 5y, 8.8% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF CENTRAL TEXAS — $250,010 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetINSTITUTE OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT INC — $225,151 over 9y, 2.7% of budgetGALILEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP — $191,115 over 9y, 2.9% of budgetSONRISAS THERAPEUTIC RIDING INC — $190,957 over 7y, 20% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF MENARD — $185,252 over 7y, 24% of budgetTEXAS SOUTHWEST COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA — $171,816 over 5y, 9.8% of budgetOZONA COMMUNITY CENTER — $144,192 over 6y, 13% of budgetLA ESPERANZA CLINIC INC — $93,140 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetTOM GREEN COUNTY ADULT LITERACY COUNCIL — $44,491 over 2y, 28% of budget
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 CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF GREATER WEST TEXAS
  • Who funds WEST TEXAS COUNSELING AND GUIDANCE
  • Who funds YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN ANGELO TEXAS
  • Who funds ALCOHOL & DRUG ABUSE COUNCIL FOR THE CONCHO VALLEY
  • Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE CONCHO VALLEY
  • Who funds SAN ANGELO EARLY CHILDHOOD CENTER
  • Who funds Concho Valley Regional Food Bank
  • Who funds CONCHO VALLEY HOME FOR GIRLS INC
  • Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF CENTRAL TEXAS
  • Who funds INSTITUTE OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT INC
  • Who funds GALILEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP
  • Who funds SONRISAS THERAPEUTIC RIDING INC
  • Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF MENARD
  • Who funds TEXAS SOUTHWEST COUNCIL INC BOY SCOUTS OF AMERICA
  • Who funds OZONA COMMUNITY CENTER
  • Who funds LA ESPERANZA CLINIC INC
  • Who funds TOM GREEN COUNTY ADULT LITERACY COUNCIL
  • Who funds CONCHO VALLEY TURNING POINT

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.

San Angelo Area FoundationTX36.6× affinity15 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: San Angelo Area Foundation · San Angelo Health Foundation · Mary Ellen Kent Bunyard Family Foundation · Art and Eva Camunez Tucker Foundation · Kickapoo Springs 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 organization United Way of the Concho Valley 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%your share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 22 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph