Loading…
· Public charity
CICOA Aging & In-Home Solutions Inc
CICOA Aging & In-Home Solutions empowers older adults, those of any age with a disability and family caregivers to achieve the greatest possible independence, dignity and quality of life.
$925k
Granted FY2023
19
Grants
1
Communities
$264k
Largest
01What you fund
0173% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2023.
Human Services$2.5MCrime & Legal$1.6MHealth$205kHousing & Shelter$5kOther$1.6M
02FY2023 · 19 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2023
- Under $10k3 grants · $27k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $309k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $325k
- $250k+1 grant · $264k
$27,244
Median grant
1
States reached
$14M
Total assets
Largest grants
- Indiana Legal Services Inc$264,445
- Hendricks County Senior Services$109,147
- Primelife Enrichment Inc$88,531
- Shelby Senior Services$65,548
- Johnson County Senior Services$61,385
- Boone County Senior Services Inc$49,880
- Catholic Charities IN Adult Day Services$38,500
- Hancock County Senior Services$37,578
- Morgan County Connect$34,800
- TMP Enterprises Inc$27,244
- Little Red Door Cancer Agency$27,106
- The Villages$25,500
- Alzheimer's Association of Greater Indiana$22,000
- Shepherd's Center of Hamilton County$21,000
- Joy's House$14,233
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 (FY18–23, $2.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 9% — the area typically sits at 9%. 41% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 line in 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, United Way ALICE — 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.
100%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$5.9M · 19 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +36% since the first grant, against -56% for the ones you funded once.
19 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
19
2
Total granted
$5.9M
$11k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+36%
-56%
Still filing today
74%
50%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Human ServicesCrime & LegalHealthHousing & ShelterOther
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
- ILIndiana Legal Services Inc6× · 2018–2023 · $1.6M · revenue +145%
Hendricks County Senior Services6× · 2018–2023 · $678k · revenue +57%- CCCatholic Charities IN Adult Day Services6× · 2018–2023 · $325k · revenue +11%
Funded once
- HPHERITAGE PLACEone grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue -56%
- IOINDIANAPOLIS OASISone grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue -96%
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
Aging and Community Services of South
The agency was organized to provide services to elderly and disabled persons in the state of Indiana.
Human Services
2
Tippecanoe County Council On Aging Inc
Providing seniors with services and programs to promote overall wellness.
Human Services
3
Lifetime Resources Inc
To provide services to elderly, disabled, and low to moderate income individuals of any age in the southeastern part of the State of Indiana.
Human Services
4
Clermont Senior Services Inc
To offer a broad range of community based and Home-Care Services designed to enable older adults to remain independent and active by living healthy lives.
Human Services
5
Eldercare Services Institute Llc
Eldercare services institute, llc provides a full-range of home and community based services for older adults and their caregivers.
Health
6
Senior Services Center of Will County
To enhance the quality of life for older persons
—
7
Senior Community Services Inc
To provide services that promote active and meaningful aging and remain in the community.
Human Services
8
Garfield County Senior Housing
To provided affordable rental housing to senior citizens.
Housing & Shelter
9
Achieving Independence and Mobility Cil
Independent living services for persons with disabilities.
Human Services
10
Shared Services Home Health Care
Provide homecare services to persons who are elderly in a manner which respects their rights, dignity and worth.
Health
11
Garden Path Elder Living Inc
Garden Path Elder Living operates a residential care home for elders that provide assistance with daily living and nursing oversight.
Human Services
12
Seniors Assistance Center
Provide necessary services to senior citizens.
—
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Shelby Senior Services Inc and the most unlike its peers is Sycamore Rehabilitation Services. 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
16 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/16
Grantees still filing
9/16
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Human Services$2,514,144Crime & Legal$1,611,480Other$1,593,555Health$204,923Housing & Shelter$5,402
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 Indiana Legal Services Inc ↗
- Who funds Hendricks County Senior Services ↗
- Who funds Shelby Senior Services ↗
- Who funds Primelife Enrichment Inc ↗
- Who funds Catholic Charities IN Adult Day Services ↗
- Who funds Boone County Senior Services Inc ↗
- Who funds Hancock County Senior Services ↗
- Who funds TMP Enterprises Inc ↗
- Who funds Morgan County Connect ↗
- Who funds Little Red Door Cancer Agency ↗
- Who funds The Villages ↗
- Who funds Johnson County Senior Services ↗
- Who funds John Boner Community Center ↗
- Who funds Shepherd's Center of Hamilton County ↗
- Who funds HERITAGE PLACE ↗
- Who funds INDIANAPOLIS OASIS ↗
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.
Central Indiana Community Foundation IncIN37.9× affinity16 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Central Indiana Community Foundation Inc · United Way of Central Indiana Inc · Lilly Endowment Inc · The Indianapolis Foundation Inc · Nicholas H Noyes Jr Memorial · Duke Energy Foundation · Second Helpings Inc · Hamilton County Community Foundation Inc · Early Learning Indiana Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
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 organisation CICOA Aging & In-Home Solutions 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.
2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
typical government reliance, FY20–25
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. 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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Primelife Enrichment Inc.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
high risk
~0 months of operating runway; revenue contracted over 7 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 351411017 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on Primelife Enrichment Inc, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 0 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 15% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to CICOA Aging & In-Home Solutions Inc?
Find your warmest path to CICOA Aging & In-Home Solutions Inc through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines