Skip to content
Agesmart Community Resources at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Agesmart Community Resources

AGESMART COMMUNITY RESOURCES enhances the lives of older adults, persons with disabilities and veterans through advocacy, action and answers on aging.

$7.0M
Granted FY2025still arriving
23
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$2.7M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Human Services$26MFood & Nutrition$15MHealth$4.2MCrime & Legal$2.4MCommunity Improvement$384kYouth Development$206kEducation$7kOther$0
02FY2025 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $159k
  • $50k–250k13 grants · $1.8M
  • $250k+6 grants · $5.1M
$165,371
Median grant
2
States reached
$3.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SENIOR SERVICES PLUS INC$2,701,823
LESSIE BATES DAVIS$960,774
WESTERN EGYPTIAN EOC$466,007
MILLSTADT TOWNSHIP SENIOR SERVICES$331,785
CLINTON COUNTY SENIOR SERVICES INC$325,001
BOND COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER$297,455
LAND OF LINCOLN LEGAL ASSISTANCE$248,500
WASHINGTON COUNTY SENIOR SERVICES$239,923
Individual grant recipient$225,534
COMMUNITY LIFE LINE$206,418
SAINT JOHN'S COMMUNITY CARE$166,413
NE RANDOLPH COUNTY SENIOR SERVICES$165,371
MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM$135,721
COLLINSVILLE AREA MINISTERIAL ASSN$117,917
HEALTHVISIONS EAST ST LOUIS$77,766
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, $13.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%THE OASIS INSTITUTE: $202k → 11%THE OASIS INSTITUTE: $164k → 11%THE OASIS INSTITUTE: $87k → 11%THE OASIS INSTITUTE: $52k → 11%THE OASIS INSTITUTE: $51k → 11%WESTERN EGYPTIAN EOC: $524k → 15%WESTERN EGYPTIAN EOC: $518k → 15%WESTERN EGYPTIAN EOC: $466k → 15%WESTERN EGYPTIAN EOC: $412k → 15%WESTERN EGYPTIAN EOC: $374k → 15%WESTERN EGYPTIAN EOC: $349k → 15%WESTERN EGYPTIAN EOC: $335k → 15%WESTERN EGYPTIAN EOC: $329k → 15%WESTERN EGYPTIAN EOC: $307k → 15%MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM: $151k → 16%MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM: $146k → 16%MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM: $136k → 16%MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM: $123k → 16%MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM: $120k → 16%MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM: $92k → 16%MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM: $83k → 16%MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM: $73k → 16%MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM: $57k → 16%CHILDREN'S HOME & AID: $26k → 12%CHILDREN'S HOME & AID: $25k → 12%CHILDREN'S HOME & AID: $21k → 12%CHILDREN'S HOME & AID: $30k → 16%CHILDREN'S HOME & AID: $21k → 12%CHILDREN'S HOME & AID: $20k → 16%CHILDREN'S HOME & AID: $6k → 16%LESSIE BATES DAVIS: $1.2M → 16%LESSIE BATES DAVIS: $1.2M → 16%LESSIE BATES DAVIS: $961k → 16%LESSIE BATES DAVIS: $816k → 16%LESSIE BATES DAVIS: $803k → 16%LESSIE BATES DAVIS: $679k → 16%LESSIE BATES DAVIS: $669k → 16%LESSIE BATES DAVIS: $623k → 16%LESSIE BATES DAVIS: $570k → 16%COMMUNITY LIFE LINE: $206k → 16%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.
$61M · 28 repeat orgs$568k to everyone else

28 repeat relationships: 22 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

28
6

Total granted

$61M
$362k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%
+58%

Still filing today

68%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $206k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthCrime & LegalOther
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

  • SS
    SENIOR SERVICES PLUS INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $18M · revenue +30%
  • WE
    WESTERN EGYPTIAN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $3.6M · revenue +63%
  • LO
    LAND OF LINCOLN LEGAL AID INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.4M · revenue +66%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $144k
  • SJ
    SAINT JOHN'S COMMUNITY CARE
    one grant, 2021 · $65k
  • SJ
    SAINT JOHN'S COMMUNITY CENTER
    one grant, 2020 · $64k
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
Aging and Community Services of South Central Indiana Inc

Working together, our mission is to enhance the quality of life in our communities, generation through generation to assist older adults, persons with disabilities, and persons that have needs, to access opportunities that will allow them…

Human Services
2
Mid-Illinois Senior Services Inc

To provide a variety of services for senior citizens

Human Services
3
Senior Services of Central Illinois

To support and serve seniors with non-medical services and to promote independent living and enrich quality of life.

Food & Nutrition
4
Heartland Resources Inc

Provide programs that provide service to elderly and handicapped individuals

Human Services
5
Council On Aging & Human Services

Enhancing lives and building communities by providing transportation and nutrition services.

Human Services
6
Harlan County Senior Services Inc

Offers programs & services to older persons such as meals, house keeping, yard work, public transportation, and social activities.

Human Services
7
Living Center Inc

Enhancing the quality of life through integrated healthcare.

—
8
Lincoln Council On Aging Inc

Lincoln council on aging, inc. provides meals, transportation, health and social services to the elderly residents of lincoln parish, louisiana.

Human Services
9
Central Missouri Area Agency On Aging

Aging Best's mission is to help people be as independent as possible as they navigate through life by delivering the best support, services, and programs.

Human Services
10
Harrison County Council On Aging

Provide services & meals to the elderly.

Human Services
11
Seniorage Area Agency On Aging

A federally designated Area Agency on Aging whose mission is to bring independence enhancing supportive services to the 60+ population and their caregivers in our 17 county-wide service area.

Human Services
12
Albert Gallatin Human Service Agency Inc

Senior citizen programs through the area agency on aging which provides a center, services, congregate meals and home delivery meals.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Senior Services Plus Inc; the most unlike its peers is Linc Inc. 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

23 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. 23 of the 35 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.

6
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/23
Grantees still filing
18/23
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SENIOR SERVICES PLUS INC: $17,975,814 · OtherSENIOR SERVICES PLUS INCIndividual grant recipient: $12,667,697 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCLINTON COUNTY SENIOR SERVICES INC: $2,168,598 · OtherHEALTHVISIONS MIDWEST INC: $2,142,601 · OtherBOND COUNTY SENIOR CENTER: $1,982,883 · OtherMILLSTADT TOWNSHIP SENIOR SERVICES: $1,934,167 · OtherWASHINGTON COUNTY SENIOR SERVICES INC: $1,723,266 · Other+17 more: $4,583,373 · Other+17 moreLESSIE BATES DAVIS NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE INC: $7,494,749 · Human ServicesLESSIE BATES DAVIS NEIG…WESTERN EGYPTIAN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC: $3,614,009 · Human ServicesWESTERN EGYPTIAN ECONOM…MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM INC: $981,573 · Human ServicesMASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVIC…THE OASIS INSTITUTE: $555,276 · Human Services+2 more: $357,745 · Human ServicesLAND OF LINCOLN LEGAL AID INC: $2,405,627 · Crime & LegalSOUTHWESTERN ILLINOIS VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION: $519,209 · HealthFaith in Action Nfp: $303,639 · HealthCHESTNUT HEALTH SYSTEMS INC: $144,000 · Health+1 more: $26,000 · Health
Other$45,178,399Human Services$13,003,352Crime & Legal$2,405,627Health$992,848

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 budgetSENIOR SERVICES PLUS INC: $17,975,814 over 9y, 19% of budgetLESSIE BATES DAVIS NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE INC: $7,494,749 over 9y, 20% of budgetWESTERN EGYPTIAN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC: $3,614,009 over 9y, 5.2% of budgetLAND OF LINCOLN LEGAL AID INC: $2,405,627 over 9y, 3.5% of budgetCLINTON COUNTY SENIOR SERVICES INC: $2,168,598 over 9y, 74% of budgetHEALTHVISIONS MIDWEST INC: $2,142,601 over 9y, 12% of budgetBOND COUNTY SENIOR CENTER: $1,982,883 over 9y, 23% of budgetWASHINGTON COUNTY SENIOR SERVICES INC: $1,723,266 over 9y, 48% of budgetNortheastern Randolph County Senior Services Inc: $1,104,857 over 9y, 43% of budgetMASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM INC: $981,573 over 9y, 56% of budgetCOLLINSVILLE AREA MINISTERIAL ASSN: $903,880 over 9y, 9.7% of budgetTHE OASIS INSTITUTE: $555,276 over 5y, 3.0% of budgetST JOHNS HEALING COMMUNITY BOARD: $549,000 over 4y, 15% of budgetSOUTHWESTERN ILLINOIS VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION: $519,209 over 9y, 1.7% of budgetFaith in Action Nfp: $303,639 over 9y, 46% of budgetWELLSPRING RESOURCES: $248,148 over 6y, 31% of budgetCHILDREN'S HOME & AID SOCIETY OF ILL: $151,327 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetCHESTNUT HEALTH SYSTEMS INC: $144,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetIMPACT CIL: $103,473 over 4y, 3.7% of budgetLinc Inc: $39,416 over 4y, 2.3% of budgetHUMAN SUPPORT SERVICES: $26,000 over 2y, 0.2% 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 SENIOR SERVICES PLUS INC ↗
  • Who funds LESSIE BATES DAVIS NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSE INC ↗
  • Who funds WESTERN EGYPTIAN ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds LAND OF LINCOLN LEGAL AID INC ↗
  • Who funds CLINTON COUNTY SENIOR SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds HEALTHVISIONS MIDWEST INC ↗
  • Who funds BOND COUNTY SENIOR CENTER ↗
  • Who funds WASHINGTON COUNTY SENIOR SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds Northeastern Randolph County Senior Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds MASCOUTAH SENIOR SERVICES PROGRAM INC ↗
  • Who funds COLLINSVILLE AREA MINISTERIAL ASSN ↗
  • Who funds THE OASIS INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds ST JOHNS HEALING COMMUNITY BOARD ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHWESTERN ILLINOIS VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds Faith in Action Nfp ↗
  • Who funds WELLSPRING RESOURCES ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY LIFE LINE ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN'S HOME & AID SOCIETY OF ILL ↗
  • Who funds CHESTNUT HEALTH SYSTEMS INC ↗
  • Who funds IMPACT CIL ↗
  • Who funds Linc Inc ↗
  • Who funds CALL FOR HELP INC ↗
  • Who funds HUMAN SUPPORT SERVICES ↗

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.

United Way of Greater…St Louis Community Fo…Meals on Wheels Ameri…Amazonsmile Foundation
United Way of Greater St Louis IncMO27.4× affinity11 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of Greater St Louis Inc · St Louis Community Foundation Inc · Meals on Wheels America · 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 Agesmart Community Resources funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Agesmart Community Resources. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Agesmart Community Resources?

    Find your warmest path to Agesmart Community Resources 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.

    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 35 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 Agesmart Community Resources’ filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home