Loading…
Loading…
Texas · Nonprofit
PowerHouse Texas (Texas) is funded by 7 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $1,145,000 in grants to it, the largest being The Cynthia & George Mitchell Foundation ($300,000). 4 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
PowerHouse Texas runs a healthier operating margin than three-quarters of the 693 public benefit nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 693 public benefit nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2025
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
95% of PowerHouse Texas’s revenue is contributions — more donation-reliant than the typical peer (74% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 0 of the last 2 reported years ran a deficit.
Grant income rose $400k → $445k on a roughly flat funder count — a concentrated base.
From the IRS filings of PowerHouse Texas’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
PowerHouse Texas has a broad base — no single funder exceeds 26% of grant income, and it takes 3 funders to reach half.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 3 funders to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2022 38% · 2023 42% · 2024 34% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
PowerHouse Texas is locally rooted: 58% of its grant income comes from Texas funders.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 7 funders put you under-funded among the 400 organizations that share them.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
78% of spending goes to programs.
0%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Operates in 1 state
Part of a family of 1 related entity
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2025 (financials across 2023–2025), and the filings of 7funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing