Skip to content

· 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 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 2025.

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

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

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

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 (FY17–25, $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 its 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
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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has 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
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

  • 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
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
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.

—
2
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
3
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
4
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
5
Boys & Girls Club of Northeast Tx Inc

To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reachtheir full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens throughafter school and summer youth development programs.

Youth Development
6
Boys & Girls Club of Ennis

To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens.

Youth Development
7
South Texas Pregnancy Care Center

Crisis pregnancy counseling.

Health
8
Boys & Girls Club of San Marcos

To inspire and enable all young people to realize their full potential as responsible and caring citizens.

—
9
Boys and Girls Club of McAllen Inc

To enable all young people especially those who need us most to reach their full potential as productive caring responsible citizens.

—
10
Lubbock Family Outreach Center Inc Dba Family Guidance & Outreach Center

The Family Guidance & Outreach Center of Lubbock is dedicated to the prevention of child abuse and neglect and supporting, mentoring, and educating parents.

Human Services
11
Boys and Girls Clubs of the San Luis Valley Inc

To ensure that all children and youth, especially those who need us most, are offered opportunities to realize their full potential as responsible, caring, and productive citizens of a richly diverse world.

Youth Development
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Concho Valley Home for Girls Inc; 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 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. 18 of the 22 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/18
Grantees still filing
12/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and 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 grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's 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
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 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 ↗

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.

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

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's 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, 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 22 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 the Concho Valley’s filings →

    More from the funding graph