Skip to content
Angels in Disguise Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Angels in Disguise Inc

To educate the public about the capabilities and worth of children with down syndrome and to educate and assist, financially and otherwise, the parents of children with down syndrome and other disabilities, with the education, research and care for their children.

$49k
Granted FY2023
2
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$30k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2023.

Human Services$291kInternational$35kHealth$23kReligion$7kEducation$6k
02FY2023 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $37,044, the rows itemized in this filing. The $48,744 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $11,700 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $30k
$30,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$96k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
REECE'S RAINBOW$30,000
GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION$7,044
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 (FY17–23, $293k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 9% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION: $7k → 11%LUTHERAN SOCIAL SVC OF WI & UPPER MI: $10k → 17%HOLT INTERNATIONAL: $5k → 15%SHAOHANNAH'S HOPE INC DBA SHOW HOPE: $10k → 4%AMERICA WORLD ADOPTION ASSISTANCE: $5k → 6%REECE'S RAINBOW: $60k → 6%ST MARY'S CENTER: $1k → 15%SHAOHANNAH'S HOPE INC DBA SHOW HOPE: $10k → 4%REECE'S RAINBOW: $41k → 6%ADOPTION ASSISTANCE INC: $3k → 15%REECE'S RAINBOW: $41k → 6%REECE'S RAINBOW: $40k → 6%REECE'S RAINBOW: $30k → 6%REECE'S RAINBOW: $17k → 6%REECE'S RAINBOW: $15k → 6%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
WI
OR
OH
PA
NJ
KY
VA
MD
TN
TX
FL
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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$300k · 5 repeat orgs$62k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2023, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
11

Total granted

$300k
$55k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-21%
+10%

Still filing today

100%
55%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
Human ServicesInternationalPhilanthropyOther
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

  • RR
    REECE'S RAINBOW INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $243k · revenue -73%
  • HO
    HEARTS OF JOY INTERNATIONAL CORP
    2× · 2019–2020 · $20k · revenue +248%
  • SH
    SHAOHANNAHS HOPE INC dba SHOW HOPE
    2× · 2019–2020 · $20k · revenue -21%

Funded once

  • LUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +50%
  • GF
    GRACE FELLOWSHIP CHURCH
    one grant, 2017 · $7k
  • SM
    SAINT MARTIN DE PORRES LAY
    one grant, 2022 · $6k
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
United in Love Adoptions
Human Services
2
Hand in Hand Christian Adoption Inc
—
3
All About U Adoptions Inc
Human Services
4
Deliver Rescuing Children At Risk

Finding forever homes for children

Human Services
5
New Hope for Adopted International Kids

Help struggling families and children who have been adopted from international families in other countries work to adjust to their new life and bring some into other families

Human Services
6
Adopt International

To assist people in adopting domestic and international children educate families about adoption and provide counseling to birth parents

Human Services
7
Connecting Hearts Inc

Adoption agency services

Human Services
8
Adoption Authority Inc

Providing compassion, respect, and loving care to each individual on their unique adoption journey. We commit to honoring and nurturing expectant mothers through pregnancy, birth, and life after placement.

—
9
International Family Services Inc

Domestic adoptions and home study evaluations

Human Services
10
Carolina Adoption Services Inc

Carolina adoption services provides international and domestic adoption services, foster care, home studies, and post adoption support for children, youth and adoptive families.

Human Services
11
A Lifetime Adoption Foundation
Human Services
12
Heartsent Adoptions Inc

Heartsent Adoptions Inc is a full service domestic and international adoption agency that provides assistance and education to adopting parents and families.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Shaohannahs Hope Inc dba Show Hope; the most unlike its peers is Jerome Lejeune Foundation Usa. 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

13 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. 13 of the 17 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
5/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

REECE'S RAINBOW INC: $242,904 · Human ServicesREECE'S RAINBOW INCSHAOHANNAHS HOPE INC dba SHOW HOPE: $20,000 · Human ServicesSHAOHANNAHS HOPE INC dba SHOW HOPELUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC: $10,000 · Human Services+5 more: $20,544 · Human Services+5 moreCHILDRENS HOUSE INTERNATIONAL: $10,000 · OtherCHILDRENS H…GRACE FELLOWSHIP CHURCH: $7,000 · OtherGRACE FELLO…SAINT MARTIN DE PORRES LAY: $5,933 · OtherSAINT MARTI…INTERNATIONAL DOWN SYNDROME COALITION: $5,663 · OtherINTERNATION…BETHANY CHRISTIAN SERVICES: $5,000 · OtherBETHANY CHR…GIFT OF LIFE: $2,500 · OtherGIFT OF LIF…HEARTS OF JOY INTERNATIONAL CORP: $20,000 · InternationalHEART OF ADOPTIONS ALLIANCE INC: $5,000 · InternationalJerome Lejeune Foundation USA: $7,500 · Philanthropy
Human Services$293,448Other$36,096International$25,000Philanthropy$7,500

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetREECE'S RAINBOW INC: $242,904 over 7y, 7.6% of budgetHEARTS OF JOY INTERNATIONAL CORP: $20,000 over 2y, 8.4% of budgetSHAOHANNAHS HOPE INC dba SHOW HOPE: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLUTHERAN SOCIAL SERVICES OF WISCONSIN AND UPPER MICHIGAN INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHILDRENS HOUSE INTERNATIONAL: $10,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHE GLADNEY CENTER FOR ADOPTION: $7,044 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL DOWN SYNDROME COALITION: $5,663 over 1y, 9.2% of budgetHEART OF ADOPTIONS ALLIANCE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetHOLT INTERNATIONAL CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICA-WORLD ADOPTION ASSOCIATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetADOPTION ASSISTANCE INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSMC REGINA'S CENTER: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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.

AbbVie FoundationNatl Christian Charit…American Endowment Fo…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
AbbVie FoundationIL11.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: AbbVie Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Angels in Disguise Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Angels in Disguise Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 17 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $32k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Angels in Disguise’s 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