· Public charity
Childrens Action Alliance Inc
Through research publications, media campaigns, and advocacy, CAA seeks to influence policies and decisions affecting the lives of Arizona children and their families on issues related to health, child abuse and neglect, early care and education, budget and taxes, children and immigration and working families.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 5 grants below total $122,377 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $128,377 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $6,000 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AZ ADVISORY COUNCIL INDIAN HC | $35,000 |
| ASIAN PACIFIC COMM IN ACTION | $30,000 |
| AZ FRIENDS OF FOSTER CHILDREN | $22,877 |
| Child & Family Resources Inc | $22,000 |
| ARIZONA CENTER FOR EMPOWERMEN | $12,500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY25–25, $75k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +785% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
4 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 10% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $110k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
ARIZONA CENTER FOR EMPOWERMENT4× · 2019–2025 · $213k · revenue ×13- AFARIZONA FOOD BANK NETWORK2× · 2021–2022 · $70k · revenue +785%
ONE ARIZONA2× · 2019–2021 · $50k · revenue +416%
Funded once
- SHSOUTHWEST HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATEDone grant, 2024 · $109k · revenue -15%
- PAPROGRESS ARIZONAgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue +177%
- SASOUTHERN AZ ASSOC FOR THE ED OF YOUNG CHILDRENone grant, 2023 · $24k · revenue -3%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Az wins is a coalition of organizations dedicated to achieving public policies that benefit working arizona families and advancing an inclusive, engaged, just and equitable state for all arizonans. in 2024 az wins substantially reduced its…
AzAEYC promotes high-quality early learning for all children, birth through age 8, by connecting practice, policy and research. We advance a diverse, dynamic early childhood profession and support all who care for, educate and work on…
Bringing together diverse voices to advance health and healthcare in arizona.
Pro-Choice Arizona centers abolition and reproductive justice values to prioritize community needs. We advance reproductive equity, pregnancy and family justice, and abortion access for all folks living in Arizona through direct service…
To promote and facilitate the development and delivery of affordable and accessible primary healthcare for everyone in arizona through advocacy, education and technical assistance.
The arizona center for afterschool excellence is dedicated to the enhancement of child and youth development and educational achievement through quality afterschool programming.
To elevate the education profession and promote the cause of education and to provide member support in arizona.
A nonprofit professional organization working to improve the health of Arizona communities through advocacy, education, and professional development.
To encourage the formation of Local Trades and Labor Unions and to help working men and women achieve higher standards of living and working conditions in the state of Arizona.
Opportunity arizona is an issue advocacy organization whose mission is to grow more opportunities and improve the quality of life for hard-working arizonans.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Arizona Early Childhood Education Association and the most unlike its peers is Southwest Human Development Incorporated. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 14 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 ARIZONA CENTER FOR EMPOWERMENT ↗
- Who funds SOUTHWEST HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds ARIZONA FOOD BANK NETWORK ↗
- Who funds PROGRESS ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds ONE ARIZONA ↗
- Who funds ASIAN PACIFIC COMMUNITY IN ACTION ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN AZ ASSOC FOR THE ED OF YOUNG CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds Arizona Early Childhood Education Association ↗
- Who funds ARIZONA HEAD START ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Arizona Friends of Foster Children Foundation ↗
- Who funds CHILD & FAMILY RESOURCES INC ↗
- Who funds REGIONAL CENTER FOR BORDER HEALTH INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · Virginia G Piper Charitable Trust · Charities Aid Foundation America · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Childrens Action Alliance 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.
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.