· Public charity
United Way of the Greater Tri-County Area
To increase the organized capacity of the community to meet the health and human services needs in the fort hood area.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 12 grants below total $116,357 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $130,510 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $14,153 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k7 grants · $49k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $68k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF GREATER CENTRAL TEXAS INC | $16,000 |
| FAMILIES IN CRISIS INC | $14,955 |
| COVE HOUSE HOMELESS SHELTER INC | $13,993 |
| FOOD CARE CENTER | $11,900 |
| CENTRAL TEXAS YOUTH SERVICES BUREAU INC | $11,000 |
| THE REFUGE CORPORATION | $7,893 |
| CASA OF BELL & CORYELL COUNTIES | $7,750 |
| KILLEEN HELP CENTER - SAN SABA | $7,736 |
| CENTRAL TEXAS 4C INC | $7,525 |
| HCCAA - KILLEEN - NUTRITION PROGRAM | $6,255 |
| BRING EVERYONE IN THE ZONE | $6,250 |
| GREATER KILLEEN FREE CLINIC | $5,100 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $171k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 48% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +54% since the first grant, against -38% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- CICOMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF GREATER CENTRAL TEXAS INC8× · 2017–2024 · $219k · revenue +31%
- HCHILL COUNTRY COMMUNITY ACTION ASSOCIATION INC8× · 2017–2024 · $140k · revenue +28%
- FIFAMILIES IN CRISIS8× · 2017–2024 · $136k · revenue +177%
Funded once
- KPKILLEEN POLICE DEPARTMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE FUNDone grant, 2017 · $17k · revenue -38%
- ARAMERICAN RED CROSS HEART OF TEXAS AREA CHAPTERone grant, 2017 · $6k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
To provide family services and to provide residential child care for dependent children where there is a need to assist children and families disrupted by problems.
To provide shelter to abused families.
A state of texas licensed foster care and adoption agency that identifies and provides approved healing foster homes for children.
The childrens advocacy center of hidalgo county, inc. provides services to abused children. services include on-site referrals for medical services. the organization follows up with authorities on efforts against the perpetrators of the…
Charitable and educational purposes for homeless in-school youth and their families. to provide a safe place and nurturing environment to unaccompanied homeless youth and their families in order to attain success with academic, social and…
To provide shelter, supervision, and counseling for children in crisis; to cooperate with other agencies in order to resolve problems related to the welfare of these children; to assist the families of these children in seeking possible…
Crisis pregnancy counseling.
The family abuse center exists to eliminate domestic violence in central texas by sheltering victims of domestic violence and by preventing abuse from occurring through intervention and education.
To strengthen the lives of children and families.
The mission of the Child Crisis Center is to protect children, newborn through fifteen years of age, from abuse/neglect by providing temporary short-term emergency shelter and family support services.
Shelter for homeless and abused women and children.
Working in creative collaboration to provide quality care that transforms the lives of at-risk children and their families through the active compassion of christ.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Central Texas 4C Inc and the most unlike its peers is Bring Everyone in the Zone. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 15 of the 17 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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 COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF GREATER CENTRAL TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds HILL COUNTRY COMMUNITY ACTION ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILIES IN CRISIS ↗
- Who funds FOOD CARE CENTER ↗
- Who funds GREATER KILLEEN FREE CLINIC INC ↗
- Who funds COVE HOUSE EMERGENCY HOMELESS SHELTER INC ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL TEXAS YOUTH SERVICES BUREAU ↗
- Who funds REFUGE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL TEXAS 4C INC ↗
- Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF CENTRAL TEXAS ↗
- Who funds Fort Cavazos Community Habitat for Humanity Inc ↗
- Who funds CENIKOR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds KILLEEN POLICE DEPARTMENT LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE FUND ↗
- Who funds BRING EVERYONE IN THE ZONE ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF CENTRAL TEXAS 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.
Open a dossier: United Way of Central Texas Inc · Cadence Bank Foundation · Rock Rose Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Greater Tri-County Area 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to United Way of the Greater Tri-County Area?
Find your warmest path to United Way of the Greater Tri-County Area through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.