Skip to content
First Focus at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

First Focus

Bipartisan advocacy organization dedicated to making children and families the priority in federal policy and budget decisions.

$120k
Granted FY2019
5
Grants FY2019
5
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2019.

Civil Rights$490kCrime & Legal$118kHuman Services$70kEducation$50kReligion$30kYouth Development$18kHealth$10kPublic Benefit$10k
02FY2019 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2019

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $80k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $200k
$20,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$6.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Idaho Voices for Children$200,000
Voices for Ohios Children$20,000
Childrens Advocacy Alliance$20,000
Voices for Illinois Children$20,000
Child and Family Policy Center$20,000
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 (FY17–19, $138k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 93% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Children Now: $10k → 10%Childrens Partnership: $10k → 14%Floridas Children First: $20k → 13%Foster Adopt Connect: $20k → 15%Voices for Georgias Children: $28k → 13%Voices for Illinois Children: $20k → 14%Multi-Agency Alliance for Children: $20k → 13%Voices for Georgias Children: $10k → 13%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

AK
ME
WA
ID
IL
WI
NY
MA
OR
IA
OH
PA
NJ
CA
UT
CO
MO
KY
WV
VA
AZ
NM
AR
NC
HI
GA
TX
FL
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.

35%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$280k · 8 repeat orgs$516k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2019, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
20

Total granted

$280k
$276k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+12%
+55%

Still filing today

63%
90%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 14% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $240k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19
Human ServicesCrime & LegalCivil RightsEducationCommunity ImprovementHealthOther
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

  • TC
    Texans Care For Children Inc
    3× · 2017–2019 · $50k · revenue +260%
  • VF
    VOICES FOR GEORGIA'S CHILDREN INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $38k · revenue +149%
  • VF
    VOICES FOR VIRGINIA'S CHILDREN
    3× · 2017–2019 · $38k · revenue +12%

Funded once

  • TN
    True North Group
    2× · 2018–2019 · $30k
  • FF
    Facing Foster Care in Alaska
    2× · 2018–2019 · $20k · revenue -17%
  • FC
    FLORIDA'S CHILDREN FIRST INCgraduated
    2× · 2018–2019 · $20k · revenue +48%
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
Alaska Childrens Alliance

The Alaska Childrens Alliance strengthens Alaskas multidisciplinary response to child abuse by supporting, educating, and connecting professionals who work to protect children, promote healing for children and families, and advance…

Crime & Legal
2
Child Welfare League of America

Child welfare league of america engages its network of public and private agencies and partners to advance policies, best practices, and collaborative strategies that result in better outcomes for vulnerable children, youth, and families.

Human Services
3
Our Children Oregon

Our children oregon's mission is to be a voice and force for the common good for all oregon children, ensuring all children have the resources and opportunities they need to reach their full potential. we elevate data and the voices of…

Philanthropy
4
The Children's Agenda Inc

The Children's Agenda advocates for effective policies and drives evidence-based solutions for the health, education and success of children. We are especially committed to children who are vulnerable because of poverty, racism, health…

Human Services
5
Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families

Advocating for the development and implementation of data-driven public policy that improves child well-being in arkansas, with a focus on economic security, education, health, early childhood, child welfare, juvenile justice, and racial…

Human Services
6
Minnesota Chapter of the National Childrens Alliance

The Minnesota Children's Alliance leads the development and growth of locally based children's advocacy centers and multidisciplinary teams to ensure equitable access to services for healing and growth.

Crime & Legal
7
Childrens Advocacy Center for Child Abuse Assessment and Treatment

We provide children affected by violence and their families with services of support, forensic interviews, resources, and hope.

Crime & Legal
8
Florida Alliance of Children's Councils & Trusts Inc

To promote policies that build effective primary prevention and early intervention systems of support for florida's children and families by engaging and enhancing the collective strengths of the individual children's services councils of…

—
9
Colorado Child Advocacy Alliance

To support the missions of child advocacy centers in colorado to help children and their families heal from abuse and neglect via training, technical assistance, collaboration and strategic partnerships.

Crime & Legal
10
California Alliance of Caregivers

California Alliance of Caregivers represents the voices of relative and non-relative caregivers to promote the well-being of children in foster care. California Alliance of Caregivers provides training information support and advocacy for…

Health
11
Advocates for Illinois Children

Improve the lives of children in illinois by bringing about significant changes in public policies and programs for children through research, policy analysis and advocacy, public education and community outreach.

Human Services
12
Children's Advocacy Centers of Kentucky Inc

Children's advocacy centers of kentucky, inc. seeks to build relationships at the state and national levels by collaborating with partners which will benefit the work of kentucky child advocacy centers.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Utah Children; the most unlike its peers is Wispirg Foundation Inc. 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

30 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. 30 of the 31 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)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/30
Grantees still filing
19/30
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

IDAHO VOICES FOR CHILDREN FOUNDATION INC: $200,000 · Community ImprovementIDAHO VOICES FOR CHILDREN FO…CHILD AND FAMILY POLICY CENTER: $38,000 · OtherCHILD AND FAMILY POLICY CENTERCHILDRENS ACTION ALLIANCE INC: $30,000 · OtherCHILDRENS ACTION ALLIANCE INCCHILDREN FIRST FOR OREGON: $30,000 · OtherCHILDREN FIRST FOR OREGONTrue North Group: $30,000 · OtherTrue North GroupVoices for Ohios Children: $30,000 · OtherVoices for Ohios ChildrenCOLORADO CHILDREN'S CAMPAIGN: $10,000 · OtherMAINE CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $10,000 · OtherWISPIRG FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · OtherNEW MEXICO CHILD ADVOCACY NETWORKS: $8,000 · OtherPENNSYLVANIA PARTNERSHIPS FOR CHILDREN: $10,000 · OtherSCHUYLER CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND ADVOCACY INC: $10,000 · OtherVOICES FOR GEORGIA'S CHILDREN INC: $38,000 · Human ServicesVOICES FOR GEORGIA'S C…FLORIDA'S CHILDREN FIRST INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesFLORIDA'S CHILDREN FIR…FOSTERADOPT CONNECT INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesFOSTERADOPT CONNECT IN…CHILDREN'S ADVOCATES FOR CHANGE: $20,000 · Human ServicesCHILDREN'S ADVOCATES F…CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY ALLIANCE: $20,000 · Human ServicesCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY AL…MULTI-AGENCY ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesMULTI-AGENCY ALLIANCE …CHILDREN NOW: $10,000 · Human ServicesCHILDREN NOWTHE CHILDREN'S PARTNERSHIP: $10,000 · Human ServicesTHE CHILDREN'S PARTNER…Texans Care For Children Inc: $50,000 · Crime & LegalTexans Care For…Facing Foster Care in Alaska: $20,000 · Crime & LegalFacing Foster C…JUVENILE LAW CENTER: $20,000 · Crime & LegalJUVENILE LAW CE…Advocates for Children of New York: $10,000 · Crime & LegalAdvocates for C…MASSACHUSETTS LAW REFORM INSTITUTE INC: $8,000 · Crime & LegalMASSACHUSETTS L…VOICES FOR VIRGINIA'S CHILDREN: $38,000 · Civil RightsVOICES FOR…KENTUCKY YOUTH ADVOCATES INC: $26,000 · Civil RightsKENTUCKY Y…Utah Children: $10,000 · Civil RightsUtah Child…HAWAII CHILDREN'S ACTION NETWORK: $20,000 · EducationNORTH CAROLINA PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN INC: $10,000 · EducationWEST VIRGINIA HEALTHY KIDS AND FAMILIES COALITION: $10,000 · Health
Community Improvement$200,000Other$216,000Human Services$158,000Crime & Legal$108,000Civil Rights$74,000Education$30,000Health$10,000

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 budgetTexans Care For Children Inc: $50,000 over 3y, 3.0% of budgetCHILD AND FAMILY POLICY CENTER: $38,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetVOICES FOR GEORGIA'S CHILDREN INC: $38,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetVOICES FOR VIRGINIA'S CHILDREN: $38,000 over 3y, 3.3% of budgetCHILDREN FIRST FOR OREGON: $30,000 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetVoices for Ohios Children: $30,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetKENTUCKY YOUTH ADVOCATES INC: $26,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetFacing Foster Care in Alaska: $20,000 over 2y, 8.1% of budgetFOSTERADOPT CONNECT INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCATES FOR CHANGE: $20,000 over 1y, 3.9% of budgetCHILDREN'S ADVOCACY ALLIANCE: $20,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetMULTI-AGENCY ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCHILDREN NOW: $10,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA PARTNERSHIP FOR CHILDREN INC: $10,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetAdvocates for Children of New York: $10,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetWEST VIRGINIA HEALTHY KIDS AND FAMILIES COALITION: $10,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetCOLORADO CHILDREN'S CAMPAIGN: $10,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetUtah Children: $10,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetPENNSYLVANIA PARTNERSHIPS FOR CHILDREN: $10,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetTHE CHILDREN'S PARTNERSHIP: $10,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetMAINE CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $10,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetSCHUYLER CENTER FOR ANALYSIS AND ADVOCACY INC: $10,000 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetWISPIRG FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 3y, 7.4% of budgetNEW MEXICO CHILD ADVOCACY NETWORKS: $8,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetMASSACHUSETTS LAW REFORM INSTITUTE INC: $8,000 over 2y, 0.2% 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.

Annie E Casey Foundat…Partnership for Ameri…Alliance for Early Su…The David and Lucile …American Heart Associ…Center on Budget and …Georgetown UniversityNew Venture FundMAZON A Jewish Respon…Carequest Foundation …Pritzker Family Found…Hopewell Fund
Annie E Casey Foundation IncMD39.6× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Annie E Casey Foundation Inc · Partnership for Americas Children · Alliance for Early Success Fka Birth to Five Policy Alliance · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · American Heart Association Inc · Center on Budget and Policy Priorities · Georgetown University · New Venture Fund · MAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger · Carequest Foundation Inc · Pritzker Family Foundation · Hopewell Fund

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%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
    1get no government money at all
    8report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to First Focus?

    Find your warmest path to First Focus through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 31 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2019, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on First Focus’ 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