Skip to content
Blue Ridge Partnership for Children at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Blue Ridge Partnership for Children

Family education and development of children.

$252k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$58k
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Education$276kHuman Services$195kPublic Safety & Disaster$116kHealth$114k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $171,616, the rows itemized in this filing. The $252,169 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $80,553 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $93k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $58k
$10,003
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHILDREN'S CASTLE CHILDCARE CENTER$58,492
KINGDOM KIDS CHILDCARE CENTER$33,358
YANCEY HEAD START$20,273
SPRUCE PONE MONTESSORI$19,350
BUNCOMBE COUNTY PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN$10,003
PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN OF THE FOOTHILLS$10,000
BURKE COUNTY SMART START$8,981
CHURCH STREET PRESCHOOL INC$5,950
AVERY COUNTY SCHOOLS$5,209
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 70% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%SMART START PARTNERSHIP: $10k → 12%MOUNTAIN AREA HEALTH EDUCATION CENTER INC: $94k → 12%RESOURCES FOR RESILENCE: $37k → 12%SMART START OF TRANSYLVANIA: $10k → 13%KINGDOM KIDS CHILDCARE CENTER: $33k → 15%YANCEY HEAD START: $20k → 15%MADISON COUNTY PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN: $9k → 15%TOE RIVER HEALTH DISTRICT: $74k → 16%CHILDREN'S CASTLE CHILDCARE CENTER: $58k → 16%PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN OF THE FOOTHILLS: $10k → 16%REGION A PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN: $12k → 18%MOUNTAIN AREA HEALTH EDUCATION CENTER INC: $32k → 12%AVERY COUNTY COOPERATIVE EXTENSION: $6k → 15%CHURCH STREET PRESCHOOL INC: $11k → 15%TOE RIVER HEALTH DISTRICT: $55k → 16%PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN OF THE FOOTHILLS: $8k → 16%MOUNTAIN AREA HEALTH EDUCATION CENTER INC: $19k → 12%AVERY COUNTY SCHOOLS: $5k → 15%YANCEY COUNTY COOPERATIVE EXTENSION: $9k → 15%TOE RIVER HEALTH DISTRICT: $53k → 16%BUNCOMBE COUNTY PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN: $10k → 12%YANCEY COUNTY COOPERATIVE EXTENSION: $7k → 15%MITCHELL COUNTY COOPERATIVE EXTENSION: $9k → 16%CHURCH STREET PRESCHOOL INC: $7k → 15%MITCHELL COUNTY COOPERATIVE EXTENSION: $7k → 16%THE CHILDREN'S GARDEN INC: $7k → 15%TOE RIVER HEALTH DISTRICT: $5k → 16%CHURCH STREET PRESCHOOL INC: $6k → 15%SPRUCE PONE MONTESSORI: $19k → 16%CHURCH STREET PRESCHOOL INC: $6k → 15%CHURCH STREET PRESCHOOL INC: $6k → 15%CHURCH STREET PRESCHOOL INC: $6k → 15%YANCEY COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY: $6k → 15%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.

61%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$431k · 6 repeat orgs$271k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +28% since the first grant, against -1% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
8

Total granted

$431k
$116k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
-1%

Still filing today

50%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 9% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $156k went to new ones.

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

  • TR
    TOE RIVER HEALTH DISTRICT
    4× · 2020–2023 · $188k
  • MA
    MOUNTAIN AREA HEALTH EDUCATION CENTER INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $146k · revenue +34%
  • CS
    CHURCH STREET PRESCHOOL INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $41k · revenue -39%

Funded once

  • RF
    Resources for Resilience
    one grant, 2024 · $37k · revenue 0%
  • AS
    APPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2020 · $25k
  • RA
    REGION A PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN
    one grant, 2024 · $12k · revenue -1%
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
North Carolina Partnership for Children Inc

The north carolina partnership for children (ncpc) is the lead organization and backbone of the smart start network, setting statewide vision, policy, and funding priorities. while local partnerships translate the statewide vision into…

Education
2
Partnership for Children of Cumberland County Inc

The partnership's mission is to be the driving force to engage partners to achieve lasting positive outcomes for all children, beginning at birth.

Education
3
Guilford County Partnership for Children Inc

The Guilford County Partnership for Children is a local non-profit strategically directing Smart Start and NC Pre-K funding to ensure equitable access to high quality childcare, professional development for early childhood educators and…

Education
4
Early Years Inc

Early years leads efforts to strengthen accessible and affordable quality early care and education by providing support for families, communities and the workforce. early years 's primary purpose is to provide services, research and…

—
5
Durham's Partnership for Children

To ensure every child in durham enters school ready to succeed, we lead community strategies for children birth to 5, and their families that promote healthy development and learning and echance access to high quality care.

Education
6
Surry County Early Childhood Partnership

For the future health and vitality of Surry County, the mission of the Surry County Early Childhood Partnership is to take action on behalf of the people of Surry County to support children 0 to 5 and their families through partnerships…

Education
7
Onslow County Partnership for Children

When they have challenges, we connect all children and their families to programs and resources that provide opportunities and hope.

Education
8
Partnership for Children of Johnston County Inc

The Partnership effectively utilizes a multitude of resources to ensure that Johnston's youngest residents and their families receive educational, health, and emotional support services, preparing children for lifelong success.

Education
9
Orange County Partnership for Young Children

To ensure that every child in orange county arrives at school healthy and ready to succeed. we focus on the early years of a child's life, from birth to five, which is the most critical time in a child's development.

Education
10
Down East Partnership for Children

Launch every child as a healthy, lifelong learner by the end of the third grade. This is accomplished through working across the four building blocks of early education. 1) Health and development are on track beginning before birth 2)…

Education
11
Martin Pitt Partnership for Children Inc

To make meaningful and measurable investments in the quality of life for young children and families in education, health, and support services.

Education
12
Montgomery County Partnership for Children Inc

To develop and implement strategies that will improve the education, health, and well-being of young children and their families in montgomery county, north carolina.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Burke County Smart Start Inc; the most unlike its peers is Spruce Pine Montessori School 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

12 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. 12 of the 21 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
3/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TOE RIVER HEALTH DISTRICT: $187,813 · OtherTOE RIVER HEALTH DISTRICTCHILDREN'S CASTLE CHILDCARE CENTER: $58,492 · OtherCHILDREN'S CASTLE CHILDCARE CENTERCHURCH STREET PRESCHOOL INC: $41,128 · OtherCHURCH STREET PRESCHOOL INCKINGDOM KIDS CHILDCARE CENTER: $33,358 · OtherKINGDOM KIDS CHILDCARE CENTERAPPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY: $24,851 · OtherAPPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITYEast Yancey Water and Sewer District: $21,900 · OtherSPRUCE PINE MONTESSORI SCHOOL INC: $19,350 · OtherCOUNTY OF MITCHELL: $16,400 · Other+3 more: $17,621 · OtherMOUNTAIN AREA HEALTH EDUCATION CENTER INC: $145,763 · EducationMOUNTAIN AREA HEALTH EDUCATION CENTER INCResources for Resilience: $37,345 · EducationResources for ResilienceINTERMOUNTAIN CHILDRENS SERVICES: $20,273 · EducationINTERMOUNTAIN CHILDRENS SERVICESPARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN OF THE FOOTHILLS INC: $17,603 · EducationPARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN OF THE FOOTHILLS INCREGION A PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN: $12,000 · EducationBLUE RIDGE PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN: $10,003 · EducationSMART START PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDRE: $10,000 · EducationSMART START OF TRANSYLVANIA COUNTY: $10,000 · Education+2 more: $18,051 · Education+2 more
Other$420,913Education$281,038

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMOUNTAIN AREA HEALTH EDUCATION CENTER INC: $145,763 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCHURCH STREET PRESCHOOL INC: $41,128 over 6y, 9.8% of budgetResources for Resilience: $37,345 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetINTERMOUNTAIN CHILDRENS SERVICES: $20,273 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetSPRUCE PINE MONTESSORI SCHOOL INC: $19,350 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetPARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN OF THE FOOTHILLS INC: $17,603 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetREGION A PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN: $12,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBLUE RIDGE PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN: $10,003 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSMART START PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDRE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSMART START OF TRANSYLVANIA COUNTY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetMADISON COUNTY PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN & FAMILIES INC: $9,070 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetBURKE COUNTY SMART START INC: $8,981 over 1y, 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.

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.

Dogwood Health TrustThe Community Foundat…North Carolina Partne…Amazonsmile Foundation
Dogwood Health TrustNC29.9× affinity12 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Dogwood Health Trust · The Community Foundation of Western North Carolina Inc · North Carolina Partnership for Children Inc · 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 Blue Ridge Partnership for Children funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Blue Ridge Partnership for Children. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%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
    7report 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.

    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 21 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 Blue Ridge Partnership for Children’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