Skip to content
Children's Funding Project at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Children's Funding Project

CHILDREN'S FUNDING PROJECT helps communities and states expand equitable opportunities for children and youth through strategic public financing.

$185k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$46k
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, FY2022 to 2024.

Education$56kPhilanthropy$44kHuman Services$22kCivil Rights$20kSocial Science$8kPublic Benefit$7k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$46,200
Median grant
4
States reached
$8.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LEARN TO EARN DAYTON$46,200
UNITED WAY OF TUCSON AND SOUTHERN ARIZONA$46,200
UNITED WAY OF MUSCATINE IOWA$46,200
POUGHKEEPSIE CHILDRENS CABINET INC$46,200
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 (FY24–24, $20k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CHILDREN NOW: $20k → 10%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
MI
NY
IA
OH
CA
AZ
TN
NC
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.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$205k · 3 repeat orgs$69k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
6

Total granted

$205k
$69k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+1%

Still filing today

100%
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%’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’22’23’24’25
EducationHuman ServicesPublic BenefitOther
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

  • PC
    POUGHKEEPSIE CHILDRENS CABINET INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $68k
  • LT
    LEARN TO EARN DAYTON
    2× · 2024–2025 · $68k · revenue +34%
  • UW
    UNITED WAY OF MUSCATINE IOWA
    2× · 2024–2025 · $68k · revenue 0%

Funded once

  • CHILDREN NOW
    one grant, 2024 · $20k · revenue 0%
  • THE WASHINGTON STEM CENTER
    one grant, 2022 · $20k · revenue -54%
  • TS
    THE SYCAMORE INSTITUTE INC
    one grant, 2023 · $8k · revenue +1%
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
Utah's Promise

Utah's promise (up) is committed to 100% of kids and families thriving. we unify leaders, partners, communities and systems to achieve that promise.

Philanthropy
2
Wake County Smart Start Inc

Wake county smart start invests in young children, their families, and a connected early childhood system that supports and prepares them for school and life ahead.

Education
3
Think Small

To advance quality care and education of children in their crucial early years.

Human Services
4
Kids Win Missouri

Kids Win Missouri furthers child well-being by advancing the health, education, safety and development of Missouri children and their families, especially those who are at-risk because of poverty, abuse, neglect, racial inequities or other…

Human Services
5
Tennesseans for Quality Early Education

To advance state policies and practices that ensure all tennessee children from birth through 3rd grade get the high quality early education they need to power our state's future.

Education
6
North Carolina Early Education Coalition

Act as an organization to provide education, information distribution, training, newsletters, fact sheets, and other materials to educate communities about the importance of high quality childhood education, especially for infants and…

Education
7
Foundations for a Better Oregon

Foundations for a better oregon advances oregon's commitment to supporting every child to learn, grow, and thrive. we build bridges between community, policymakers, and philanthropy, setting a foundation for shared vision and collective…

Education
8
The Campbell Institute

Children's institute's mission is to leverage research, practice, policy, and advocacy to shift systems toward justice for families so that all of oregon's children, prenatal to grade 5, have access to opportunity.

Unclassified
9
Center for Public Policy Priorities

At the Every Texan, we believe in a Texas that offers everyone the chance to compete and succeed in life. We envision a Texas where everyone is healthy, well educated, and financially secure. We want the best Texas, a proud state that sets…

Public Benefit
10
Thrive By 5 Louisville Inc

Thrive by 5 louisville is making early learning a top priority for louisville, breaking down barriers for the future of our children and city.

Education
11
Whole Child Collaborative

To provide a holistic, multidisciplinary education to learners of all abilities

Education
12
Social Impact Partners Inc

Social Impact Partners ("SIP") is an innovative nonprofit organization dedicated to closing the opportunity divide in Connecticut by expanding pathways to living wage jobs and economic mobility for all, working with partners across the…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Washington Stem Center; the most unlike its peers is Blueprint North Carolina. 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

POUGHKEEPSIE CHILDRENS CABINET INC: $68,200 · OtherPOUGHKEEPSIE CHILDRENS CABINET INCUNITED WAY OF MUSCATINE IOWA: $68,200 · OtherUNITED WAY OF MUSCATINE IOWALEARN TO EARN DAYTON: $68,200 · EducationLEARN TO EARN DAYTONTHE WASHINGTON STEM CENTER: $20,000 · EducationTHE WASHINGTON STEM CENTERPRESCHOOL PROMISE INC: $8,000 · EducationPRESCHOOL PROMISE INCBLUEPRINT NORTH CAROLINA: $6,500 · EducationBLUEPRINT NORTH CAROLINAFIRST STEPS KENT: $6,000 · EducationFIRST STEPS KENTUnited Way of Tucson and Southern Arizona Inc: $68,200 · PhilanthropyUnited Way of Tucson a…CHILDREN NOW: $20,000 · Human ServicesTHE SYCAMORE INSTITUTE INC: $8,070 · Public Benefit
Other$136,400Education$108,700Philanthropy$68,200Human Services$20,000Public Benefit$8,070

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 budgetPOUGHKEEPSIE CHILDRENS CABINET INC: $68,200 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetLEARN TO EARN DAYTON: $68,200 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetUNITED WAY OF MUSCATINE IOWA: $68,200 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetUnited Way of Tucson and Southern Arizona Inc: $68,200 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetCHILDREN NOW: $20,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE WASHINGTON STEM CENTER: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE SYCAMORE INSTITUTE INC: $8,070 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetPRESCHOOL PROMISE INC: $8,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBLUEPRINT NORTH CAROLINA: $6,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFIRST STEPS KENT: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE6.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Children's Funding Project funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Children's Funding Project. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    5report 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 10 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 Funding Project’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