Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Cenla Area Agency on Aging Inc

To improve the quality of life for seniors age 60 and older by procuring and providing services to allow them to remain in their communities for as long as possible in accordance with the older americans' act of 1965 and the state of louisiana office of elderly affairs' regulations.

$5.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$766k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202025.

Human Services$17MFood & Nutrition$993kCrime & Legal$33k
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 18 grants below total $4,907,008 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $5,577,262 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $670,254 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $21k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $1.4M
  • $250k+10 grants · $3.5M
$256,968
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RAPIDES COUNCIL ON AGING$765,905
AVOYELLES COUNCIL ON AGING$506,365
RAPIDES SENIOR CENTER$335,371
LASALLE COUNCIL ON AGING$298,900
GRANT COUNCIL ON AGING INC$282,120
UNION COUNCIL ON AGING$281,167
WINN COUNCIL ON AGING$278,295
CONCORDIA COUNCIL ON AGING$272,976
RICHLAND COUNCIL ON AGING$256,968
MADISON COUNCIL ON AGING$255,009
CATAHOULA COUNCIL ON AGING$240,799
JACKSON COUNCIL ON AGING$233,071
ALLEN COUNCIL ON AGING$216,124
FRANKLIN COUNCIL ON AGING$197,327
TENSAS COUNCIL ON AGING$178,850
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $5.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 28%, against an area that typically sits at 20%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 20%ALLEN COUNCIL ON AGING: $216k → 21%WINN COUNCIL ON AGING: $278k → 24%MADISON COUNCIL ON AGING: $328k → 24%CONCORDIA COUNCIL ON AGING: $273k → 28%TENSAS COUNCIL ON AGING: $179k → 35%EAST CARROLL COUNCIL ON AGING: $166k → 42%ALLEN COUNCIL ON AGING: $140k → 21%WINN COUNCIL ON AGING: $264k → 24%MADISON COUNCIL ON AGING: $255k → 24%CONCORDIA COUNCIL ON AGING: $160k → 28%TENSAS COUNCIL ON AGING: $161k → 35%EAST CARROLL COUNCIL ON AGING: $143k → 42%ALLEN COUNCIL ON AGING: $127k → 21%WINN COUNCIL ON AGING: $238k → 24%CONCORDIA COUNCIL ON AGING: $149k → 28%TENSAS COUNCIL ON AGING: $93k → 35%EAST CARROLL COUNCIL ON AGING: $124k → 42%ALLEN COUNCIL ON AGING: $101k → 21%WINN COUNCIL ON AGING: $166k → 24%CONCORDIA COUNCIL ON AGING: $105k → 28%TENSAS COUNCIL ON AGING: $75k → 35%EAST CARROLL COUNCIL ON AGING: $99k → 42%ALLEN COUNCIL ON AGING: $99k → 21%WINN COUNCIL ON AGING: $141k → 24%CONCORDIA COUNCIL ON AGING: $64k → 28%TENSAS COUNCIL ON AGING: $59k → 35%EAST CARROLL COUNCIL ON AGING: $96k → 42%ALLEN COUNCIL ON AGING: $79k → 21%WINN COUNCIL ON AGING: $101k → 24%MADISON COUNCIL ON AGING: $122k → 24%CONCORDIA COUNCIL ON AGING: $56k → 28%TENSAS COUNCIL ON AGING: $27k → 35%EAST CARROLL COUNCIL ON AGING: $71k → 42%MADISON COUNCIL ON AGING: $111k → 24%MADISON COUNCIL ON AGING: $110k → 24%MADISON COUNCIL ON AGING: $51k → 24%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$18M · 18 repeat orgs$33k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +39% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.

18 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
1

Total granted

$18M
$33k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+35%

Still filing today

89%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesCivil RightsCrime & LegalOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

  • RC
    RAPIDES COUNCIL ON AGING INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $2.5M · revenue +28% · 55% of their budget
  • AC
    Avoyelles Council on Aging Inc
    6× · 2020–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +46% · 36% of their budget
  • WC
    WINN COUNCIL ON AGING INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +16% · 60% of their budget

Funded once

  • AL
    ACADIANA LEGAL SERVICE CORPORATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $33k · revenue +35%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Jackson County Council On Aging

Provide services to local seniors to improve their quality of life and assist them in remaining in their homes

Human Services
2
Evangeline Council On Aging Inc

To deliver services to the elderly of evangeline parish. we are the designated agency (in affiliation with regional & state agencies) for meal services,senior center, homemaker, transportation and similar services to the aging.

Human Services
3
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
4
St Mary Council On Aging Inc

To deliver services to the elderly of st. mary parish. we are the designated agency (in affiliation with regional & state agencies) for meal services, senior center, homemaker, transportation and similar services to the aging.

5
Vermilion Council On Aging Inc

To deliver services to the elderly of vermillion parish. we are the designated agency (in affiliation with regional & state agencies) for meal services,senior center, homemaker, transportation and similar services to the aging.

Human Services
6
Harrison County Council On Aging

Provide services & meals to the elderly.

Human Services
7
Lafayette Council On Aging Inc

All programs are designed to deliver services to the elderly of jefferson davis parish. we are the designated agency for meal services, senior centers, homemakers, transport and other services to the aging.

Human Services
8
Fayette County Commission On Aging Incorporated

The fayette county commission on aging serves and represents those adults 60 years of age and older in fayette county. the emphasis is on improving the quality of life of those fayette county citizens, 60 and above, and providing the…

9
Routt County Council On Aging Inc

Our mission is to determine the needs of older adults in Routt County and to make every effort to meet those needs with appropriate action.

Human Services
10
Iberia Council On Aging Inc

To deliver services to the elderly of iberia parish. we are the designated agency (in affiliation with regional & state agencies) for meal services, senior center, homemaker, transportation and similar services to the aging.

11
Dyer County Office on Aging Inc

To provide activities and services for senior citizens of Dyer County

Human Services
12
The Christian County Coalition On Aging Inc

To provide home respite, housekeeping and other assistance to seniors age 60 and older that are residents of Christian County, Missouri

Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Union Council on Aging Inc and the most unlike its peers is Acadiana Legal Service Corporation. 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

17 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 17 of the 19 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

13
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
17/17
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Avoyelles Council on Aging Inc — $1,965,521 · OtherAvoyelles Council on Aging IncLASALLE COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $1,019,459 · OtherLASALLE COUNCIL ON AGING INCGrant Council on Aging Inc — $992,979 · OtherGrant Council on Aging IncRapides Senior Citizens Center INC — $967,778 · OtherRapides Senior Citizens Center INCUnion Council on Aging Inc — $962,594 · OtherUnion Council on Aging IncRichland Voluntary Council on Aging Inc — $918,905 · OtherRichland Voluntary Council on Aging IncFAITH & HOPE IND LIVING — $858,125 · OtherFAITH & HOPE IND LIVINGJackson Council on the Aging Inc — $832,882 · OtherJackson Council on the Aging IncCATAHOULA COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $828,138 · OtherCATAHOULA COUNCIL ON AGING INC+1 more — $157,215 · OtherRAPIDES COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $2,518,780 · Human ServicesRAPIDES COUNCIL ON AGING INCWINN COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $1,187,544 · Human ServicesWINN COUNCIL ON AGING INCThe Madison Voluntary Council on Aging Inc — $977,841 · Human ServicesThe Madison Voluntary Council on Aging IncCONCORDIA COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $807,512 · Human ServicesCONCORDIA COUNCIL ON AGING INCALLEN COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $762,475 · Human ServicesALLEN COUNCIL ON AGING INCEast Carroll Council on Aging — $698,684 · Human ServicesEast Carroll Council on AgingTensas Council on Aging Inc — $593,906 · Human ServicesTensas Council on Aging IncFranklin Council on Aging Inc — $800,505 · Civil RightsACADIANA LEGAL SERVICE CORPORATION — $33,251 · Crime & Legal
Other$9,503,596Human Services$7,546,742Civil Rights$800,505Crime & Legal$33,251

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetRAPIDES COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $2,518,780 over 6y, 55% of budgetAvoyelles Council on Aging Inc — $1,965,521 over 6y, 36% of budgetWINN COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $1,187,544 over 6y, 60% of budgetLASALLE COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $1,019,459 over 6y, 51% of budgetGrant Council on Aging Inc — $992,979 over 6y, 60% of budgetThe Madison Voluntary Council on Aging Inc — $977,841 over 6y, 33% of budgetRapides Senior Citizens Center INC — $967,778 over 6y, 29% of budgetUnion Council on Aging Inc — $962,594 over 6y, 34% of budgetRichland Voluntary Council on Aging Inc — $918,905 over 6y, 54% of budgetJackson Council on the Aging Inc — $832,882 over 6y, 22% of budgetCATAHOULA COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $828,138 over 6y, 60% of budgetCONCORDIA COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $807,512 over 6y, 23% of budgetFranklin Council on Aging Inc — $800,505 over 6y, 31% of budgetALLEN COUNCIL ON AGING INC — $762,475 over 6y, 24% of budgetEast Carroll Council on Aging — $698,684 over 6y, 36% of budgetTensas Council on Aging Inc — $593,906 over 6y, 32% of budgetACADIANA LEGAL SERVICE CORPORATION — $33,251 over 1y, 0.4% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds RAPIDES COUNCIL ON AGING INC
  • Who funds Avoyelles Council on Aging Inc
  • Who funds WINN COUNCIL ON AGING INC
  • Who funds LASALLE COUNCIL ON AGING INC
  • Who funds Grant Council on Aging Inc
  • Who funds The Madison Voluntary Council on Aging Inc
  • Who funds Rapides Senior Citizens Center INC
  • Who funds Union Council on Aging Inc
  • Who funds Richland Voluntary Council on Aging Inc
  • Who funds Jackson Council on the Aging Inc
  • Who funds CATAHOULA COUNCIL ON AGING INC
  • Who funds CONCORDIA COUNCIL ON AGING INC
  • Who funds Franklin Council on Aging Inc
  • Who funds ALLEN COUNCIL ON AGING INC
  • Who funds East Carroll Council on Aging
  • Who funds Tensas Council on Aging Inc
  • Who funds ACADIANA LEGAL SERVICE CORPORATION

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

North Delta Regional Planning & Development District IncLA22.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 1 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: North Delta Regional Planning & Development District Inc · The Food Bank of Central Louisiana · Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Louisiana Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Cenla Area Agency on Aging Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    15report 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, FY2025

    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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 19 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph