Skip to content
Cope Family Center at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Cope Family Center

Cope Family Center's mission is to empower parents, nurture children, and strengthen communities.

$260k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$112k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$721kHuman Services$461kPublic Benefit$168kCommunity Improvement$87kYouth Development$44kOther$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $198,760, the rows itemized in this filing. The $259,694 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $60,934 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$111,660
Median grant
1
States reached
$4.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Community Health Initiative$111,660
ON THE VERGE$87,100
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 (FY17–25, $895k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%UP VALLEY FAMILY CENTER: $107k → 9%UPValley Family Centers: $90k → 9%UPValley Family Centers: $75k → 9%UPValley Family Centers: $74k → 9%UPValley Family Centers: $59k → 9%UPValley Family Centers: $56k → 9%ON THE MOVE: $107k → 9%ON THE VERGE: $87k → 9%On the Move: $32k → 9%On the Move: $19k → 9%On the Move: $10k → 9%Mentis: $45k → 9%Mentis: $45k → 9%Mentis: $32k → 9%Mentis: $32k → 9%Mentis: $26k → 9%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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.5M · 7 repeat orgs$37k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
1

Total granted

$1.5M
$37k

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%’17’18’19’20’21’22’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’24’25
Human ServicesHealthYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • UF
    UPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS OF NAPA COUNTY
    6× · 2017–2022 · $461k · revenue +172%
  • NV
    NAPA VALLEY CHILD ADVOCACY NETWORK INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $282k · revenue +135%
  • OT
    ON THE MOVE
    5× · 2019–2025 · $255k · revenue +73%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $37k
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 8 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

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

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
6/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS OF NAPA COUNTY: $460,647 · Human ServicesUPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS OF NAPA COUNTYON THE MOVE: $254,625 · Human ServicesON THE MOVEMENTIS: $179,589 · Human ServicesMENTISNAPA VALLEY CHILD ADVOCACY NETWORK INC: $282,452 · HealthNAPA VALLEY CHILD ADVOCACY NETWORK INCCOMMUNITY HEALTH INITIATIVE NAPA COUNTY INC: $155,760 · HealthCOMMUNITY HEALTH INITIATIVE NAPA COUNTY …Puertas Abiertas Community Resource Center: $103,325 · HealthPuertas Abiertas Community Resource Cent…GIRLS ON THE RUN NAPA & SOLANO INC DBA GIRLS ON THE RUN NORTH BAY: $44,100 · Youth DevelopmentIndividual grant recipient: $37,120 · Other
Human Services$894,861Health$541,537Youth Development$44,100Other$37,120

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 budgetUPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS OF NAPA COUNTY: $460,647 over 6y, 3.1% of budgetNAPA VALLEY CHILD ADVOCACY NETWORK INC: $282,452 over 6y, 7.6% of budgetON THE MOVE: $254,625 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetMENTIS: $179,589 over 5y, 2.1% of budgetCOMMUNITY HEALTH INITIATIVE NAPA COUNTY INC: $155,760 over 5y, 13% of budgetPuertas Abiertas Community Resource Center: $103,325 over 2y, 11% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN NAPA & SOLANO INC DBA GIRLS ON THE RUN NORTH BAY: $44,100 over 4y, 3.6% 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.

Napa Valley Vintners …St Joseph Health Nort…Community Foundation …McNabb FoundationThe California Wellne…Kaiser Foundation Hos…Queen of the Valley M…Peter a & Vernice H G…The Joseph and Vera L…Latino Community Foun…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…
Napa Valley Vintners Healthy Community FundCA20× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Napa Valley Vintners Healthy Community Fund · St Joseph Health Northern California LLC · Community Foundation of the Napa Valley · McNabb Foundation · The California Wellness Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Queen of the Valley Medical Center · Peter a & Vernice H Gasser Foundation · The Joseph and Vera Long Foundation · Latino Community Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Cope Family Center funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Cope Family Center. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 8 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 Cope Family Center’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