Skip to content
Catholic Charities of Southern Nevada at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Catholic Charities of Southern Nevada

We provide food, shelter, and comprehensive services and inspire our community through collaboration, recognizing that each person is created in the image and likeness of god, and that god's compassion transformations lives.

$24M
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$2.3M
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 2025.

Human Services$6.9MInternational$6.5MEducation$1.2MHealth$200kCrime & Legal$146k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $4,542,674, the rows itemized in this filing. The $24,176,783 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $19,634,109 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.
$1,924,677
Median grant
2
States reached
$44M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NORTHERN NEVADA INTERNATIONAL CENTER$2,337,993
ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CTR$1,924,677
CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT$280,004
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, $6.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 1% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CTR: $1.9M → 7%CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF NORTHERN NEVADA: $46k → 10%ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $1.2M → 7%ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $693k → 7%ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $642k → 7%ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $578k → 7%ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $472k → 7%ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $444k → 7%ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $442k → 7%ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $424k → 7%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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$15M · 7 repeat orgs$60k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +155% since the first grant, against +59% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
2

Total granted

$15M
$60k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+155%
+59%

Still filing today

71%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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 & LegalCivil RightsOther
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

  • EC
    ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEV COUNCIL INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $6.8M · revenue +567%
  • NN
    NORTHERN NEVADA INTERNATIONAL CENTER
    9× · 2017–2025 · $3.1M · revenue +320% · 27% of their budget
  • LA
    LEGAL AID CENTER OF SOUTHERN NEVADA
    2× · 2023–2024 · $94k · revenue +11%

Funded once

  • CC
    Catholic Charities of Northern Nevadagraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $46k · revenue +59%
  • WC
    WASHOE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
    one grant, 2018 · $14k
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 9 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/7
Grantees still filing
6/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT: $4,589,399 · OtherCLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICTNORTHERN NEVADA INTERNATIONAL CENTER: $3,107,357 · OtherNORTHERN NEVADA INTERNATIONAL CENTER+2 more: $135,327 · OtherETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEV COUNCIL INC: $6,811,884 · Human ServicesETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEV COUNCIL INC+1 more: $46,488 · Human ServicesLEGAL AID CENTER OF SOUTHERN NEVADA: $94,310 · Civil RightsVMSN INC: $78,838 · HealthNORTHERN NEVADA LEGAL AID: $51,293 · Crime & Legal
Other$7,832,083Human Services$6,858,372Civil Rights$94,310Health$78,838Crime & Legal$51,293

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 budgetETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEV COUNCIL INC: $6,811,884 over 9y, 4.1% of budgetNORTHERN NEVADA INTERNATIONAL CENTER: $3,107,357 over 9y, 27% of budgetNORTHERN NV INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH INC: $121,638 over 2y, 11% of budgetLEGAL AID CENTER OF SOUTHERN NEVADA: $94,310 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetVMSN INC: $78,838 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetNORTHERN NEVADA LEGAL AID: $51,293 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetCatholic Charities of Northern Nevada: $46,488 over 1y, 0.4% 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 ETHIOPIAN COMMUNITY DEV COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN NEVADA INTERNATIONAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN NV INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC HEALTH INC ↗
  • Who funds LEGAL AID CENTER OF SOUTHERN NEVADA ↗
  • Who funds VMSN INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTHERN NEVADA LEGAL AID ↗
  • Who funds Catholic Charities of Northern Nevada ↗

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.

Nevada Community Foun…Tahoe Community Found…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Nevada Community Foundation IncNV13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Nevada Community Foundation Inc · Tahoe Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Catholic Charities of Southern Nevada funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Catholic Charities of Southern Nevada. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 9 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 Catholic Charities of Southern Nevada’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