Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Children's Advocacy Centers of Pennsylvania

To promote and support the development, growth and continuation of the multidisciplinary approach and children's advocacy centers for the protection of pennsylvania's children.

$58k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$7k
Largest
01What you fund
0181% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY20172024.

Crime & Legal$192kHealth$141kHuman Services$47kHousing & Shelter$17kYouth Development$14kEducation$554Other$96k
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 4 grants below total $23,226 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $57,698 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $34,472 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.

$6,106
Median grant
1
States reached
$250k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MISSION KIDS CHILDREN ADVOCACY CENTER$6,609
CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER NEPA$6,106
BUCKS COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER$5,480
BUTLER COUNTY ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN$5,031
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 (FY17–24, $47k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 66% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Bucks County Children's Advocacy Center: $9k → 6%FAMILY SUPPORT LINE: $17k → 10%BUCKS COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER: $5k → 6%DELAWARE COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER - FAMILY SUPPORT LINE: $8k → 10%BUCKS COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER: $2k → 6%FAMILY SUPPORT LINE: $5k → 10%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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$503k · 20 repeat orgs$6k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +61% since the first grant, against +13% for the ones you funded once.

20 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 16 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
5

Total granted

$503k
$6k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+61%
+13%

Still filing today

80%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’23’24
Crime & LegalHealthHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterYouth DevelopmentEducationOther

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

  • MK
    MISSION KIDS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER
    6× · 2017–2024 · $44k · revenue +490%
  • CA
    CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER NEPA
    5× · 2017–2024 · $37k · revenue +89%
  • FS
    FAMILY SUPPORT LINE OF DELAWARE COUNTY INC
    3× · 2018–2020 · $31k · revenue +102%

Funded once

  • LV
    LEHIGH VALLEY HOSPITALgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue +94%
  • OT
    OVER THE RAINBOW FRANKLIN CTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue +13%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF WESTERN PA CARES FOR KIDS INC
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue -12%

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
Memphis Child Advocacy Center

The mission is to serve children who are victims of sexual and severe physical abuse through prevention, education, and intervention.

Crime & Legal
2
Childrens Center

The mission of childrens center is to support and medically assess children who are suspected victims of abuse or neglect.

Crime & Legal
3
Child Advocacy Center of Allen County Indiana

To provide neutral, child-friendly, forensic interviews and inter-agency comprehensive assessment of reported child sexual abuse victims.

Philanthropy
4
Childrens Advocacy Center of Collin County Inc

The mission of children's advocacy center of collin county is to provide safety, healing, and justice to children victimized by abuse and neglect.

Civil Rights
5
Vermilion County Child Advocacy Center

Perform forensic interviews on minor children in response to calls from either the Department of Children and Family Services or law enforcement, regarding potential abuse of the child. The Center works as an advocate for the child with…

Crime & Legal
6
Carroll County Child Advocacy Center Inc

The Carroll County Child Advocacy Center exists to champion the needs of sexually, physically, and emotionally abused children in Carroll, Haralson and Heard counties through prevention, intervention and collaboration.

7
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
8
The Children's Advocacy Center of the Bluegrass Inc

The center coordinates the investigation and treatment of the most serious cases of child abuse in the bluegrass region. all services are provided in a nurturing, friendly and safe environment at no cost to a child's family.

Human Services
9
The Crawford Child Advocacy Center

The organization's mission is to prevent and respond to abuse and victimization through proven child-centered methods, professional forensic interviews, and collaborative advocacy.

Crime & Legal
10
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
11
Family and Children's Services of Centra

To transform the lives of children and adults by providing opportunities to build self-confidence, resilience and hope.

Human Services
12
Child Advocacy Center Inc

The primary service that the cac provides is a safe, child-friendly location for interviewing of children and coordination of referral programs when an allegation of sexual abuse and/or severe physical abuse has occurred.

Crime & Legal

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Centre County Children's Advocacy Center and the most unlike its peers is Lehigh Valley Hospital. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 37 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number19%0%<5yr14%0%5–10yr19%27%10–20yr18%9%20–35yr15%59%35–55yr16%5%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value19%0%<5yr14%0%5–10yr19%19%10–20yr18%15%20–35yr15%62%35–55yr16%4%55yr+

The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 0.0% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/25
the rest of the field
10%
4,627/45,858

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

04the grantee network

22 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. 22 of the 25 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/22
Grantees still filing
21/22
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

MISSION KIDS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER — $43,694 · Crime & LegalMISSION KIDS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTERCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER NEPA — $36,636 · Crime & LegalCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER NEPAADAMS COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER — $30,908 · Crime & LegalADAMS COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTERTHE CARE CENTER OF INDIANA COUNTY INC — $29,125 · Crime & LegalTHE CARE CENTER OF INDIANA COUNTY INCPHILADELPHIA CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE — $20,418 · Crime & LegalPHILADELPHIA CHILDREN'S ALLIANCECENTRE COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER — $16,309 · Crime & LegalCENTRE COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTERLUZERNE COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC — $12,648 · Crime & LegalLUZERNE COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC+2 more — $2,658 · Crime & LegalCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF LAWRENCE COUNTY — $48,209 · HealthCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF L…MERCY LIFE CENTER CORPORATION — $30,131 · HealthMERCY LIFE CENTER CORPORATIONUPMC PINNACLE HOSPITALS — $28,091 · HealthUPMC PINNACLE HOSPITALSGEISINGER CLINIC — $16,642 · HealthGEISINGER CLINICLANCASTER GENERAL HOSPITAL — $16,475 · HealthLANCASTER GENERAL HOSPITAL+1 more — $1,500 · HealthUPMC — $32,194 · OtherUPMCYork County Children's Advocacy Center — $28,441 · OtherYork County Children'…The Childrens House — $17,705 · OtherThe Childrens HouseCOUNTY OF CHESTER — $16,633 · OtherCOUNTY OF CHESTER+1 more — $1,000 · OtherFAMILY SUPPORT LINE OF DELAWARE COUNTY INC — $30,962 · Human ServicesFAMILY SUP…Network of Victim Assistance — $16,166 · Human ServicesNetwork of…OPPORTUNITY HOUSE — $17,167 · Housing & ShelterBUTLER COUNTY ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN — $14,078 · Youth DevelopmentCHILD ADVOCATES OF BLAIR COUNTY INC — $554 · Education
Crime & Legal$192,396Health$141,048Other$95,973Human Services$47,128Housing & Shelter$17,167Youth Development$14,078Education$554

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF LAWRENCE COUNTY — $48,209 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetMISSION KIDS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER — $43,694 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER NEPA — $36,636 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetFAMILY SUPPORT LINE OF DELAWARE COUNTY INC — $30,962 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetADAMS COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER — $30,908 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetMERCY LIFE CENTER CORPORATION — $30,131 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CARE CENTER OF INDIANA COUNTY INC — $29,125 over 4y, 3.0% of budgetUPMC PINNACLE HOSPITALS — $28,091 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetPHILADELPHIA CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE — $20,418 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetThe Childrens House — $17,705 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetOPPORTUNITY HOUSE — $17,167 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetGEISINGER CLINIC — $16,642 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetLANCASTER GENERAL HOSPITAL — $16,475 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCENTRE COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER — $16,309 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetNetwork of Victim Assistance — $16,166 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetBUTLER COUNTY ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN — $14,078 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetLUZERNE COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC — $12,648 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetLEHIGH VALLEY HOSPITAL — $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOVER THE RAINBOW FRANKLIN CTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER — $1,440 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFRIENDS OF WESTERN PA CARES FOR KIDS INC — $1,218 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFAMILY SERVICES INCORPORATED — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHILD ADVOCATES OF BLAIR COUNTY INC — $554 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

National Children's Alliance IncDC29.9× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Children's Alliance Inc · The Gordon Charter Foundation · Rite Aid Healthy Futures · Charities Aid Foundation America · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Children's Advocacy Centers of Pennsylvania 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%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 25 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph