Skip to content
Egyptian Area Agency on Aging Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Egyptian Area Agency on Aging Inc

Program services for the elderly

$4.2M
Granted FY2021
14
Grants FY2021
1
States reached
$792k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Human Services$18MHealth$1.3MEducation$238kOther$0
02FY2021 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 14 grants below total $3,456,901, the rows itemized in this filing. The $4,182,819 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $725,918 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.

By grant size · FY2021

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $77k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $455k
  • $250k+6 grants · $2.9M
$219,110
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAM$792,470
WILLIAMSON CO PROG ON AGING$573,853
GOLDEN CIRCLE SENIOR CITIZENS$471,843
SENIOR ADULT SERVICES$427,637
FRANKLIN COUNTY SENIOR SERVICES$370,015
SHAWNEE HEALTH SERVICES$289,062
THE GOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY CO$219,110
SOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAM$70,031
FRANKLIN COUNTY SENIOR SERVICES$56,261
SIU AT CARBONDALE-LEGAL$55,491
GOLDEN CIRCLE SENIOR CITIZENS$54,162
SENIOR ADULT SERVICES$43,631
WILLIAMSON CO PROG ON AGING$18,854
THE GOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY CO$14,481
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 (FY17–21, $12.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 60% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%NEPA CIL: $945k → 13%WILLIAMSON COUNTY PROGRAM ON AGING: $803k → 13%THE GOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY COUNTY: $318k → 15%SOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAM: $1.0M → 16%SENIOR ADULT SERVICES: $665k → 23%NEPA CIL: $841k → 13%WILLIAMSON CO PROG ON AGING: $574k → 13%THE GOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY CO: $219k → 15%SOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAM: $792k → 16%SENIOR ADULT SERVICES: $428k → 23%NE PA CIL: $144k → 13%WILLIAMSON COUNTY PROGRAM ON AGING: $531k → 13%THE GOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY COUNTY: $195k → 15%SOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAM: $744k → 16%SENIOR ADULT SERVICES: $384k → 23%WILLIAMSON COUNTY PROGRAM ON AGING: $518k → 13%THE GOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY COUNTY: $189k → 15%SOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAM: $706k → 16%SENIOR ADULT SERVICES: $374k → 23%WILLIAMSON COUNTY PROGRAM ON AGING: $488k → 13%THE GOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY COU: $170k → 15%SOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAM: $650k → 16%SENIOR ADULT SERVICES: $345k → 23%WILLIAMSON CO PROG ON AGING: $19k → 13%THE GOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY CO: $14k → 15%SOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAM: $70k → 16%SENIOR ADULT SERVICES: $44k → 23%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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$18M · 10 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2021, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
3

Total granted

$18M
$1.2M

Still filing today

80%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21
Human ServicesHealthOther
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

  • SP
    SOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAMS INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $4.0M · revenue +7% · 83% of their budget
  • WC
    WILLIAMSON COUNTY PROGRAMS ON AGING
    8× · 2017–2025 · $2.9M · revenue +14% · 27% of their budget
  • GC
    Golden Circle Senior Citizens Council
    8× · 2017–2025 · $2.4M · revenue +7%

Funded once

  • A
    ARIS
    one grant, 2020 · $706k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $532k
  • AO
    ALL OTHERS 5000
    one grant, 2017 · $11k
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
Sherman County Senior Center Inc

To offer a nutrition program for older persons.

—
2
Franklin County Senior Citizens Inc

To keep senior citizens in their own home by providing meals, transportation, housework, yardwork, activities, health clinics, entertainment, referrals, and so forth for them.

Human Services
3
Harrison County Commission On Aging Inc

Promote participation of all citizens in health, welfare, recreational, civic cultural and education agencies and organizations of the senior citizens of the harrison county commission on aging by acting as coorinators and grantee to…

Human Services
4
Southside Senior Citizen Center

Adults day care

Human Services
5
Albert Gallatin Human Service Agency Inc

Senior citizen programs through the area agency on aging which provides a center, services, congregate meals and home delivery meals.

Human Services
6
Harrison County Council On Aging

Provide services & meals to the elderly.

Human Services
7
Harlan County Senior Services Inc

Offers programs & services to older persons such as meals, house keeping, yard work, public transportation, and social activities.

Human Services
8
Washington County Senior Services Inc

To provide congregate meals, home delivered meals, transportation, and information and assistance to senior citizens of washington county, illinois.

—
9
Senior Citizens of Fulton County Inc

Provide meals & services to senior citizens

Human Services
10
Newberry County Council On Aging

Provision of various services for the elderly and transportation services for the citizens of newberry county.

Human Services
11
Seniorage Area Agency On Aging

A federally designated Area Agency on Aging whose mission is to bring independence enhancing supportive services to the 60+ population and their caregivers in our 17 county-wide service area.

Human Services
12
Federal Way Senior Center

Senior center services

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Senior Adult Services; the most unlike its peers is Northeast Pennsylvania Center for Independent Living. 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

8 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. 8 of the 13 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAMS INC: $4,011,827 · Human ServicesSOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAMS INCWILLIAMSON COUNTY PROGRAMS ON AGING: $2,932,578 · Human ServicesWILLIAMSON COUNTY PROGRAMS ON AGINGSENIOR ADULT SERVICES: $2,240,538 · Human ServicesSENIOR ADULT SERVICESNORTHEAST PENNSYLVANIA CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING: $1,929,638 · Human ServicesNORTHEAST PENNSYLVANIA CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVINGGOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY COUNTY: $1,105,569 · Human ServicesGOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY COUNTYGolden Circle Senior Citizens Council: $2,395,637 · OtherGolden Circle Senior Citizens Cou…Franklin County Senior Services Inc: $1,858,164 · OtherFranklin County Senior Services I…ARIS: $705,529 · OtherARISIndividual grant recipient: $532,009 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY- CARBONDALE: $238,066 · Other+2 more: $37,182 · OtherSHAWNEE HEALTH SERVICE & DEVEL CORP: $1,309,469 · Health
Human Services$12,220,150Other$5,766,587Health$1,309,469

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAMS INC: $4,011,827 over 8y, 83% of budgetWILLIAMSON COUNTY PROGRAMS ON AGING: $2,932,578 over 8y, 27% of budgetGolden Circle Senior Citizens Council: $2,395,637 over 8y, 23% of budgetSENIOR ADULT SERVICES: $2,240,538 over 8y, 59% of budgetNORTHEAST PENNSYLVANIA CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING: $1,929,638 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetFranklin County Senior Services Inc: $1,858,164 over 8y, 85% of budgetSHAWNEE HEALTH SERVICE & DEVEL CORP: $1,309,469 over 8y, 0.9% of budgetGOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY COUNTY: $1,105,569 over 8y, 35% 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.

  • Who funds SOUTHERN PRIDE SENIOR PROGRAMS INC ↗
  • Who funds WILLIAMSON COUNTY PROGRAMS ON AGING ↗
  • Who funds Golden Circle Senior Citizens Council ↗
  • Who funds SENIOR ADULT SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds NORTHEAST PENNSYLVANIA CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING ↗
  • Who funds Franklin County Senior Services Inc ↗
  • Who funds SHAWNEE HEALTH SERVICE & DEVEL CORP ↗
  • Who funds GOLD PLATE PROGRAM OF PERRY COUNTY ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Egyptian Area Agency on Aging Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Egyptian Area Agency on Aging Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 13 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $6.0M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2021, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Egyptian Area Agency on Aging’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