· Private foundation
Valley Baptist Legacy Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k4 grants · $23k
- $10k–50k13 grants · $459k
- $50k–250k29 grants · $2.7M
- $250k+11 grants · $21M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UT Rio Grande Valley | $10,000,000 |
| Driscoll Children's Hospital Development Foundation | $6,250,000 |
| Moody Clinic (Brownsville Society for Crippled Children Incorporated) | $1,252,469 |
| Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute | $700,000 |
| City of Rio Hondo | $445,909 |
| Children's Bereavement Center of the Rio Grande Valley Inc | $399,311 |
| IDEA Public Schools | $366,159 |
| It's Time Texas | $345,056 |
| Plaza Amistad | $300,000 |
| Tropical Texas Behavioral Health | $260,000 |
| Harlingen Neighborhood Food Pantry | $250,000 |
| Harlingen CISD | $226,200 |
| Waco Foundation | $211,000 |
| Connect Humanity | $201,448 |
| IDRA (Intercultural Development Research Association) | $145,976 |
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 (FY19–24, $6.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 68% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +26% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.
84 repeat relationships — 33 still active in FY2024, 51 since wound down; 22 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
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, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13M 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
- DCDriscoll Children's Hospital Development Foundation2× · 2023–2024 · $17M · revenue +408% · 26% of their budget
- CDCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF BROWNSVILLE DBA COME DREAM COME BUILD3× · 2019–2022 · $3.5M · revenue +80%
- STSOUTH TEXAS EMERGENCY CARE FOUNDATION INC4× · 2019–2022 · $1.3M · revenue +44%
Funded once
- SUSYRACUSE UNIVERSITY - IVMFone grant, 2019 · $1.2M
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2019 · $505k
- CCCameron County Parks & Recreationone grant, 2023 · $500k
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.
Health care services are provided to low to moderate income families who are residents of South Texas. Services are provided at a low cost are based on abiilty to pay base. Approximately 18,022 patients were served in the fiscal year.
To provide comprehensive primary care and preventive care to all persons regardless of their ability to pay.
Empowering north texans to optimize health through outreach, education, prevention, evidence-based interventions, integration, and quality measurement.
Provide community-based primary healthcare with particular concern for the poor and needy. with a coordinated and holistic apporach in caring for body, mind, and spirit, offer affordable health care, social service, and health education…
Healthy Family Services of Texas is dedicated to promoting the physical, mental, and emotional health of our patients by offering comprehensive healthcare services and wellness programs.
South Texas Rural Health Services, Inc. provides charitable health services, including the recruitment of health care personnel to the rural service area, and primarily serves the low income population.
Vida Y Salud-Health Systems, Inc. was founded in 1972 and provides health services to the people of Zavala,Dimmit,LaSalle,Uvalde and surrounding counties. The clinic maintains four program/service delivery sites and provides services such…
Provide family planning and reproductive healthcare services to both adults and teenagers, with particular emphasis on serving low-income and medically underserved populations.
To develop and implement effective age-appropriate, consumer-driven, evidence-based services to prevent and reduce substance use and strengthen mental wellness across the southernmost Texas communities.
Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas Family Planning and Preventative Health provides comprehensive and complementary health care services in settings that preserve and protect the essential privacy and rights of the individual, advocates…
Texans Care for Children shapes public policies and brings Texans together to make children a statewide priority. We work so kids can have what they need to be healthy, secure, and thriving and so every Texan can have the best start to…
Crisis pregnancy counseling.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Children's Bereavement Center of the Rio Grande Valley Inc and the most unlike its peers is Rio Grande Valley Long Term Disaster Recovery. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 32 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
96 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. 96 of the 180 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 Driscoll Children's Hospital Development Foundation ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION OF BROWNSVILLE DBA COME DREAM COME BUILD ↗
- Who funds IT'S TIME TEXAS INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTH TEXAS EMERGENCY CARE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds IDEA Public Schools ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF HARLINGEN ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF SOUTHERN CAMERON COUNTY ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK OF RIO GRANDE VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds MEADOWS MENTAL HEALTH POLICY INSTITUTE FOR TEXAS ↗
- Who funds SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds PLAZA AMISTAD ↗
- Who funds HOLY FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds Good Neighbor Settlement House Inc ↗
- Who funds CULTURE OF LIFE MINISTRIES ↗
- Who funds HARLINGEN NEIGHBORHOOD FOOD PANTRY ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HOPE PROJECTS INC ↗
- Who funds AMIGOS DEL VALLE 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: Raul Tijerina Jr Foundation · Methodist Healthcare Ministries of South Texas Inc · Knapp Community Care Foundation · The John G and Marie Stella Kenedy Memorial Foundation · Brownsville Foundation for Health and Education · Serafy Foundation · Carl C Anderson Sr and Marie Jo Anderson Charitable Foundation · The Moody Foundation · Meadows Foundation Inc · Jules D Gosseaux Foundation Inc · Rio Grande Valley Philanthropic Foundation · Neal & Lourdes Simmons 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 Valley Baptist Legacy Foundation 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.
- Mhp Salud — 66% of income from government
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 Valley Baptist Legacy Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Valley Baptist Legacy Foundation 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.