Skip to content
Children's Advocacy Centers of Arkansas at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Children's Advocacy Centers of Arkansas

Promote, support, and assist the development, growth, and continuation of child advocacy centers in the state of arkansas to better serve victims of child abuse and their families.

$4.9M
Granted FY2025still arriving
18
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$432k
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 2024.

Crime & Legal$8.4MHuman Services$6.3MHealth$867kAnimals$787kCivil Rights$396k
02FY2025 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k7 grants · $1.3M
  • $250k+11 grants · $3.6M
$280,420
Median grant
2
States reached
$3.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHILDRENS PROTECTION CENTER$431,653
HAMILTON HOUSE CHILD & FAMILY$398,404
WHITE CO CHILDREN'S SAFETY CTR$374,698
CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER OF$352,999
NORTHEAST AR CAC$338,494
CHILDRENS SAFETY CENTER INC$309,143
TEXARKANA CAC$307,813
SOUTH AR CHILDRENS COALITION$289,334
GRANDMA'S HOUSE CAC$280,420
RIVER VALLEY CAC$279,099
CENTRAL ARKANSAS CHILD ADVOCACY CEN$255,640
MENDING HEARTS CSC OF EASTERN AR$232,575
COOPER ANTHONY MERCY CAC$228,212
PERCY & DONNA MALONE CSC$183,728
CAC OF PINE BLUFF$182,720
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 (FY18–25, $4.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 71% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%GRANDMA'S HOUSE CAC: $292k → 13%CENTRAL ARKANSAS CHILD ADVOCACY CEN: $256k → 15%RIVER VALLEY CAC: $284k → 15%White Co Childrens Safety: $15k → 16%MENDING HEARTS CSC OF EASTERN AR: $277k → 34%GRANDMA'S HOUSE CAC: $280k → 13%CENTRAL ARKANSAS CHILD ADVOCACY CEN: $241k → 15%RIVER VALLEY CAC: $279k → 15%White Co Childrens Safety: $15k → 16%MENDING HEARTS CSC OF EASTERN AR: $242k → 34%GRANDMA'S HOUSE CAC: $246k → 13%CENTRAL ARKANSAS CHILD ADVOCACY CEN: $185k → 15%RIVER VALLEY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $245k → 15%MENDING HEARTS CSC OF EASTERN AR: $233k → 34%GRANDMA'S HOUSE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY: $244k → 13%CENTRAL ARKANSAS CHILD ADVOCACY CEN: $170k → 15%RIVER VALLEY CAC: $232k → 15%MENDING HEARTS CHILD SAFETY CENTER: $20k → 34%GRANDMA'S HOUSE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY: $146k → 13%CENTRAL ARKANSAS CHILD ADVOCACY CEN: $168k → 15%RIVER VALLEY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $150k → 15%Grandmas House: $40k → 13%Central AR CAC: $15k → 15%River Valley CAC: $8k → 15%Grandmas House: $15k → 13%CENTRAL ARKANSAS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $15k → 15%RIVER VALLEY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $8k → 15%GRANDMA'S HOUSE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER: $15k → 13%Central AR CAC: $15k → 15%River Valley CAC: $8k → 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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$22M · 19 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

19 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
0

Total granted

$22M
$0

Still filing today

100%
0%

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
Crime & LegalHuman ServicesCivil RightsAnimalsHealthPhilanthropyOther
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

  • CP
    CHILDREN'S PROTECTION CENTER
    8× · 2018–2025 · $1.9M · revenue +217% · 28% of their budget
  • HC
    HAMILTON CENTER FOR CHILD ADVOCACY
    8× · 2018–2025 · $1.7M · revenue +168% · 42% of their budget
  • CA
    CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF BENTON COUNTY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.5M · revenue +214%

Funded once

    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
    Child Advocacy Center

    To combat child sexual and physical abuse by providing services to children and families in a safe enviroment.

    Human Services
    2
    Children's Advocacy Center of Ottawa Countyinc

    Providing advocacy services for child abuse victims.

    Crime & Legal
    3
    Walker County Childrens Advocacy Center Inc

    Walker County Childrens Advocacy Center, Inc. will provide services to child victims of physical and sexual abuse, severely neglected children and children who have witnessed a violent crime. The Center will work every day to try and stop…

    Human Services
    4
    Delta Childrens Advocacy Center

    Delta Childrens Advocacy Centers mission is to respond to child abuse in the Mississippi Delta by serving and nurturing children and non-offending caregivers through a trauma-informed multidisciplinary approach.

    Crime & Legal
    5
    Guadalupe County Children's Advocacy Center

    To advocate for and provide services to children and families when there are allegations of abuse and neglect throughout the investigation,prosecution, treatment, and prevention of child abuse, and to reduce the trauma to childrent with…

    Crime & Legal
    6
    Casa of Tipton County

    Child Advocacy Services

    Crime & Legal
    7
    Children's Advocacy Center of Comal Coun

    To provide a neutral, child-friendly agency community that facilitates a multidisciplinary approach to the prevention, detection, investigation, and treatment of child abuse.

    Crime & Legal
    8
    Childrens Advocacy Center Inc

    Provide services for abused children

    —
    9
    Childrens Advocacy Center of Laredo-Web

    The center is fully operational treatment facility involving child victims of physical and sexual abuse. Children affected by abuse were provided with therapy and professional guidance through the legal and counseling system which the…

    Health
    10
    Citrus County Children's Advocacy Center Inc

    Coordinating agency for abused children

    Crime & Legal
    11
    Child and Youth Advocacy Center

    To operate a comprehensive child youth focused program based in a facility that allows law enforcement, child protection, mental health education professionals, prosecutors, medical and support services to work together to handle child…

    Human Services
    12
    Central Alabama Regional Child Advocacy Center

    Provide advocacy services for abused children in Central Alabama.

    Crime & Legal
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children's Advocacy Center of Benton County; the most unlike its peers is Ouachita Childrens Coalition. 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

    19 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.

    15
    Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
    16
    Early backer (in before they grew)
    19/19
    Grantees still filing
    17/19
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    CHILDREN'S PROTECTION CENTER: $1,947,609 · Crime & LegalCHILDREN'S PROTECTION CENTERHAMILTON CENTER FOR CHILD ADVOCACY: $1,656,680 · Crime & LegalHAMILTON CENTER FOR CHILD ADVOCACYCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF BENTON COUNTY: $1,542,751 · Crime & LegalCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF BENTON COUNTYNORTHEAST ARKANSAS CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $1,293,353 · Crime & LegalNORTHEAST ARKANSAS CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER…CHILDREN'S SAFETY CENTER: $1,215,646 · Crime & LegalCHILDREN'S SAFETY CENTERWADE KNOX CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $1,107,421 · Crime & LegalWADE KNOX CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER INCWHITE COUNTY CHILDREN'S SAFETY CENT: $1,470,413 · Human ServicesWHITE COUNTY CHILDREN'S SAFETY…Grandmas House Childrens Advocacy Center Inc: $1,277,250 · Human ServicesGrandmas House Childrens Advoc…RIVER VALLEY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $1,213,741 · Human ServicesRIVER VALLEY CHILD ADVOCACY CE…CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY ALLIANCE: $1,063,900 · Human ServicesCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY ALLIANCEMENDING HEARTS CHILD SAFETY CE: $770,911 · Human ServicesMENDING HEARTS CHILD SAFETY CESOUTH ARKANSAS CHILDREN'S COALITION: $1,252,809 · Civil RightsSOUTH ARKANSA…NORTHEAST TEXAS CASA INC: $1,249,152 · Civil RightsNORTHEAST TEX…THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF PINE BLUFF: $954,248 · OtherNE ARKANSAS COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INC: $335,051 · OtherOUACHITA CHILDRENS COALITION: $287,483 · OtherMISSION CLINICAL SERVICES: $1,166,890 · HealthPERCY AND DONNA MALONE CHILD SAFETY CENTER INC: $971,027 · AnimalsCHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER OF INDEPENDENCE COUNTY INC: $847,552 · Philanthropy
    Crime & Legal$8,763,460Human Services$5,796,215Civil Rights$2,501,961Other$1,576,782Health$1,166,890Animals$971,027Philanthropy$847,552

    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 budgetCHILDREN'S PROTECTION CENTER: $1,947,609 over 8y, 28% of budgetHAMILTON CENTER FOR CHILD ADVOCACY: $1,656,680 over 8y, 42% of budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF BENTON COUNTY: $1,542,751 over 9y, 12% of budgetWHITE COUNTY CHILDREN'S SAFETY CENT: $1,470,413 over 8y, 34% of budgetNORTHEAST ARKANSAS CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $1,293,353 over 8y, 46% of budgetGrandmas House Childrens Advocacy Center Inc: $1,277,250 over 8y, 31% of budgetSOUTH ARKANSAS CHILDREN'S COALITION: $1,252,809 over 8y, 39% of budgetNORTHEAST TEXAS CASA INC: $1,249,152 over 8y, 14% of budgetCHILDREN'S SAFETY CENTER: $1,215,646 over 9y, 8.4% of budgetRIVER VALLEY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER: $1,213,741 over 8y, 43% of budgetMISSION CLINICAL SERVICES: $1,166,890 over 9y, 26% of budgetWADE KNOX CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER INC: $1,107,421 over 9y, 34% of budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY ALLIANCE: $1,063,900 over 8y, 29% of budgetPERCY AND DONNA MALONE CHILD SAFETY CENTER INC: $971,027 over 8y, 38% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF PINE BLUFF: $954,248 over 9y, 45% of budgetCHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER OF INDEPENDENCE COUNTY INC: $847,552 over 7y, 44% of budgetMENDING HEARTS CHILD SAFETY CE: $770,911 over 4y, 61% of budgetNE ARKANSAS COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INC: $335,051 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetOUACHITA CHILDRENS COALITION: $287,483 over 2y, 79% 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 CHILDREN'S PROTECTION CENTER ↗
    • Who funds HAMILTON CENTER FOR CHILD ADVOCACY ↗
    • Who funds CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF BENTON COUNTY ↗
    • Who funds WHITE COUNTY CHILDREN'S SAFETY CENT ↗
    • Who funds NORTHEAST ARKANSAS CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
    • Who funds Grandmas House Childrens Advocacy Center Inc ↗
    • Who funds SOUTH ARKANSAS CHILDREN'S COALITION ↗
    • Who funds NORTHEAST TEXAS CASA INC ↗
    • Who funds CHILDREN'S SAFETY CENTER ↗
    • Who funds RIVER VALLEY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
    • Who funds MISSION CLINICAL SERVICES ↗
    • Who funds WADE KNOX CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
    • Who funds CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY ALLIANCE ↗
    • Who funds PERCY AND DONNA MALONE CHILD SAFETY CENTER INC ↗
    • Who funds THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF PINE BLUFF ↗
    • Who funds CHILDRENS ADVOCACY CENTER OF INDEPENDENCE COUNTY INC ↗
    • Who funds MENDING HEARTS CHILD SAFETY CE ↗
    • Who funds NE ARKANSAS COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH CENTER INC ↗
    • Who funds OUACHITA CHILDRENS COALITION ↗

    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.

    Arkansas Community Fo…Arvest FoundationNational Children's A…Network for GoodAmazonsmile Foundation
    Arkansas Community Foundation IncAR24.9× affinity10 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Arkansas Community Foundation Inc · Arvest Foundation · National Children's Alliance Inc · Network for Good · 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 Children's Advocacy Centers of Arkansas funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Children's Advocacy Centers of Arkansas. 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      0get no government money at all
      13report 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, 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 19 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 Children's Advocacy Centers of Arkansas’ 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