Skip to content
Central Coast Commission for Senior Citizens at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Central Coast Commission for Senior Citizens

To provide a variety of services to senior citizens.

$4.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1.8M
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, FY2021 to 2025.

Food & Nutrition$5.2MHuman Services$4.6MHealth$1.6MCrime & Legal$337kCommunity Improvement$124kHousing & Shelter$44k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $3,655,442, the rows itemized in this filing. The $4,461,439 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $805,997 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

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $50k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $593k
  • $250k+4 grants · $3.0M
$206,761
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SENIOR NUTRITION PROGRAM$1,827,898
FAMILY SERVICE AGENCY$533,984
COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP$356,249
SAN LUIS OBISPO LEGAL ASSISTA$294,850
LIFE STEPS FOUNDATION$206,761
LONG TERM CARE OMBUDSMAN$191,539
SANTA BARBARA COTTAGE HOSPITA$140,079
COMMUNIFY$54,473
VALLEY HAVEN$49,609
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 (FY21–25, $3.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%LIFE STEPS FOUNDATION: $207k → 14%Life Steps Foundation Inc: $336k → 14%Community Action Commission: $23k → 14%Life Steps Foundation: $205k → 14%COMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION: $21k → 14%Lifesteps Foundation: $200k → 14%LIFESTEPS FOUNDATION: $200k → 14%Family Service Agency: $627k → 14%FAMILY SERVICE AGENCY: $534k → 14%Family Service Agency: $503k → 14%FAMILY SERVICE AGENCEY: $405k → 14%COMMUNIFY: $54k → 14%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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$10M · 8 repeat orgs$1.8M to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
2

Total granted

$10M
$1.7M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+25%
+64%

Still filing today

100%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $50k went to new ones.

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

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

’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthFood & NutritionCrime & LegalOther
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

  • SN
    Senior Nutrition Program of San Luis Obispo County
    3× · 2022–2025 · $3.6M · revenue +132% · 50% of their budget
  • FS
    FAMILY SERVICE AGENCY OF SANTA BARBARA COUNTY
    4× · 2021–2025 · $2.1M · revenue +15%
  • Community Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County Inc
    4× · 2021–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +38%

Funded once

  • CA
    Community Action Commission
    one grant, 2021 · $1.6M
  • LA
    Los Amigos De Guadalupe California
    one grant, 2023 · $124k
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
San Francisco Ladies Protection and Relief Society
Health
2
Senior Citizens Organization of San Lorenzo Valley

Provide programs and activities for the San Lorenzo Valley community with a focus on helping seniors remain engaged and involved by promoting and supporting education, recreation, and social programs to ensure that all members of the…

Human Services
3
Senior Advocates of the Desert

Social Work Advocacy on behalf of low-income seniors in the Coachella Valley.

Human Services
4
Caps of Santa Barbara Inc

Lifetime assistance services for persons with developmental disabilities

—
5
Health Projects Center

Health Projects Center supports people as they age to live safely at home by delivering high quality services and programs in the Monterey Bay Region.

Crime & Legal
6
Meals On Wheels-Santa Maria Valley Inc

Deliver meals and provide informal health and welfare visits to disabled and elderly clients in the Santa Maria Valley.

—
7
Senior Network Services Inc

Senior Network Services is a nonprofit agency providing senior citizens and persons with disabilities with information, guidance and assistance in coordinating existing resources to promote independence and the highest quality of life.

Human Services
8
Salud Para La Gente

To provide high quality, comprehensive, and cost effective healthcare responsive to the needs of the communities we serve.

—
9
San Luis Obispo Medical Education and Research Foundation Inc
—
10
Council on Aging Services for Seniors

To enhance the quality of life for our aging community by providing services that promote wellbeing and maintain independence.

—
11
Santa Clarita Valley Committee On Aging

The SCVCOA and the Senior Center currently serves more than 10,000 individuals annually through varied programming for the Santa Clarita Valley and Antelope Valley that includes but is not limited to: congregate and home delivered meals…

Human Services
12
Family Service Agency of the Central Coast

Mental health services

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Action Commission of Santa Barbara County Inc; the most unlike its peers is Valley Haven. 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

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. 10 of the 11 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
9/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Senior Nutrition Program of San Luis Obispo County: $3,603,984 · Food & NutritionSenior Nutrition Program of San Lu…FAMILY SERVICE AGENCY OF SANTA BARBARA COUNTY: $2,069,220 · Human ServicesFAMILY SERVICE AGENCY OF SANTA …LIFE STEPS FOUNDATION INC: $1,147,350 · Human ServicesLIFE STEPS FOUNDATION INC+1 more: $98,403 · Human ServicesCommunity Action Commission: $1,581,440 · OtherCommunity Action CommissionCommunity Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County Inc: $1,245,958 · OtherCommunity Action Partnership…Los Amigos De Guadalupe California: $123,863 · Other+1 more: $49,609 · OtherLong Term Care Ombudsman Services of San Luis Obispo County: $874,652 · HealthLong Term Care …Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital: $732,526 · HealthSanta Barbara C…SAN LUIS OBISPO LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION: $336,850 · Crime & Legal
Food & Nutrition$3,603,984Human Services$3,314,973Other$3,000,870Health$1,607,178Crime & Legal$336,850

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 budgetSenior Nutrition Program of San Luis Obispo County: $3,603,984 over 3y, 50% of budgetFAMILY SERVICE AGENCY OF SANTA BARBARA COUNTY: $2,069,220 over 4y, 4.3% of budgetCommunity Action Partnership of San Luis Obispo County Inc: $1,245,958 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetLIFE STEPS FOUNDATION INC: $1,147,350 over 5y, 7.4% of budgetLong Term Care Ombudsman Services of San Luis Obispo County: $874,652 over 4y, 78% of budgetSanta Barbara Cottage Hospital: $732,526 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetSAN LUIS OBISPO LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION: $336,850 over 2y, 19% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACTION COMMISSION OF SANTA BARBARA COUNTY INC: $98,403 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetVALLEY HAVEN: $49,609 over 1y, 30% 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.

The Community Foundat…Hutton Foundation Dba…Direct ReliefDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Community Foundation San Luis ObispoCA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Community Foundation San Luis Obispo · Hutton Foundation Dba Hutton Parker Foundation · Direct Relief · 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 Central Coast Commission for Senior Citizens funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Central Coast Commission for Senior Citizens. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 11 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 Central Coast Commission for Senior Citizens’ 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