Skip to content
Board of Child Care of the United Methodist Church Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Board of Child Care of the United Methodist Church Inc

The board of child care's purpose is to enrich communities, one family at a time, its program span the mid-atlantic.

$25M
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
10
States reached
$6.4M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,660,491
Median grant
10
States reached
$110M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
KENTUCKY UNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOME$6,376,446
CUNNINGHAM CHILDREN'S HOME$5,225,527
RESIDING HOPE$3,806,281
UMCH FAMILY SERVICE$2,246,947
UNITED METHODIST FAMILY SERVICES$1,660,491
MCHS FAMILY SERVICES$1,380,960
WELLROOT FAMILY SERVICES$1,141,078
UNITED METHODIST NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER$1,011,953
MERCY FIRST$995,898
PRESBYTERIAN HOME FOR CHILDREN$845,311
02The need
02

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 (FY25–25, $23.8M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 89% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%MERCY FIRST: $996k → 6%RESIDING HOPE: $3.8M → 12%MCHS FAMILY SERVICES: $1.4M → 21%UNITED METHODIST NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER: $1.0M → 12%WELLROOT FAMILY SERVICES: $1.1M → 14%UMCH FAMILY SERVICE: $2.2M → 15%CUNNINGHAM CHILDREN'S HOME: $5.2M → 19%UNITED METHODIST FAMILY SERVICES: $1.7M → 9%KENTUCKY UNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOME: $6.4M → 12%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

IL
MI
NY
OH
KY
VA
TN
AL
GA
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 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
Indiana United Methodist Children's Home Inc

To meet the special needs of each child and family served in order to help improve their quality of life. the board of trustees and staff members of the home are committed to bringing the highest quality resources available to the…

Human Services
2
United Methodist Children's Home

To provide quality compassionate behavioral healthcare services to children and families of arkansas through a comprehensive continuum of programs which include residential treatment center care, therapeutic group home care, emergency…

Human Services
3
United Methodist Children's Home

Serving abused, neglected and abandoned children through group homes and foster care; facilitating adoptions; and family preservation.

Human Services
4
Methodist Children's Homes of Mississippi Inc

Methodist childrens homes seeks to bring restoration to children and youth who have been neglected or abused. by the end of their time with us, we hope to see that they find reconciliation with their biological families, love within an…

Human Services
5
Louisiana United Methodist Children & Family Services Inc

The organization seeks to provide the highest quality of care in ministry to the diverse needs of louisiana's children and families by offering a variety of holistic services which promote personal growth and wholesome family life. the…

Human Services
6
Methodist Children's Home

Methodist children's home equips children, youth, and families to flourish by offering hope through christian-centered relationships, services, and support.

Human Services
7
United Methodist Home for Children Inc

Provide a safe and caring program for youth that inspires hope for the future and stresses personal responsibility within an atmosphere of respect for everyone.

—
8
United Methodist Youth Home Inc

Operates Group Homes and Day Treatment Program for teens placed through the courts and licensed by the Indiana Department of Child Services.

Human Services
9
Sunny Glen Children's Home Inc

Sunny Glen Childrens Home, Inc. cares for children in need. Our care will be competent, compassionate and professional. We will help every child achieve their greatest potential-physically, emotionally, spiritually and academically.

Human Services
10
Central Texas Children's Home

To provide family services and to provide residential child care for dependent children where there is a need to assist children and families disrupted by problems.

Human Services
11
Mbch Children and Family Ministries

To provide programs and services for children, youth and families throughout missouri.

Human Services
12
First United Methodist Church Child Development Center

Operation of a daycare program for children.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Methodist Children's Home; the most unlike its peers is Cunningham Childrens Home of Urbana Il. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

10 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
4/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

METHODIST HOME OF KENTUCKY INC: $6,376,446 · Human ServicesMETHODIST HOME OF KENTUCKY INCCUNNINGHAM CHILDRENS HOME OF URBANA IL: $5,225,527 · Human ServicesCUNNINGHAM CHILDRENS HOME OF URBANA ILFLORIDA UNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOME INC: $3,806,281 · Human ServicesFLORIDA UNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOME INCUNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOME: $2,246,947 · Human ServicesUNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOMEUnited Methodist Family Services of Virginia: $1,660,491 · Human ServicesUnited Methodist Family Services of VirginiaMethodist Children's Home Society: $1,380,960 · Human ServicesMethodist Children's Home SocietyUNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOME OF THE NORTH GA CONFERENCE INC: $1,141,078 · Human ServicesUNITED METHODIST NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS INC: $1,011,953 · Human ServicesMERCYFIRST: $995,898 · Human ServicesPRESBYTERIAN HOME FOR CHILDREN: $845,311 · Other
Human Services$23,845,581Other$845,311

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCUNNINGHAM CHILDRENS HOME OF URBANA IL: $5,225,527 over 1y, 16% of budgetFLORIDA UNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOME INC: $3,806,281 over 1y, 14% of budgetUnited Methodist Family Services of Virginia: $1,660,491 over 1y, 6.6% of budgetUNITED METHODIST CHILDREN'S HOME OF THE NORTH GA CONFERENCE INC: $1,141,078 over 1y, 12% of budgetMERCYFIRST: $995,898 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetPRESBYTERIAN HOME FOR CHILDREN: $845,311 over 1y, 25% 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.

Raymond James Charita…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…Natl Christian Charit…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Raymond James Charitable Endowment FundFL11.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · 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 Board of Child Care of the United Methodist Church Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Board of Child Care of the United Methodist Church Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 10 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 Board of Child Care of the United Methodist Church’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