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

· Public charity

Girls Inc

GIRLS INC.

$5.7M
Granted FY2025still arriving
59
Grants FY2025still arriving
26
States reached
$277k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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 2025.

Youth Development$44MHuman Services$1.3M
02FY2025 · 59 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 59 grants below total $4,988,917, the rows itemized in this filing. The $5,685,392 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $696,475 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $36k
  • $10k–50k18 grants · $331k
  • $50k–250k35 grants · $4.3M
  • $250k+1 grant · $277k
$63,747
Median grant
26
States reached
$88M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF GREATER INDIANAPOLIS$276,555
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF LYNN$215,549
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF NEW YORK CITY$214,155
GIRLS INC OF SHELBYVILLE & SHELBY CO$207,895
GIRLS INC OF ORANGE COUNTY$205,358
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF CENTRAL ALABAMA$189,635
GIRLS INC OF GREATER PHILADELPHIA & SOUTHERN NJ$179,735
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF GREATER HOUSTON$156,486
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY$154,767
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO$152,781
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF TARRANT COUNTY$148,436
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ST LOUIS$148,095
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF GREATER ATLANTA$144,657
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF JACKSONVILLE$144,613
GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SARASOTA COUNTY$143,008
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, $3.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 44% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF THE SEACOAST: $86k → 10%GIRLS INC AT THE YWCA OF MINNEAPOLIS: $59k → 11%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ULSTER & DUTCHESS COUNTY: $44k → 16%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $276k → 16%GIRLS INC OF SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN: $60k → 10%GIRLS INC OF GREATER MADISON: $208k → 10%GIRLS INC AT THE YWCA OF MINNEAPOLIS: $85k → 11%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ULSTER & DUTCHESS COUNTY: $26k → 16%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $153k → 16%GIRLS INC OF SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN: $35k → 10%GIRLS INC OF GREATER MADISON: $107k → 10%GIRLS INC AT THE YWCA OF MINNEAPOLIS: $66k → 11%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ULSTER & DUTCHESS COUNTY: $5k → 16%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $140k → 16%GIRLS INC OF SOUTHEAST WISCONSIN: $8k → 10%GIRLS INC OF GREATER MADISON: $13k → 10%GIRLS INC AT THE YWCA OF MINNEAPOLIS: $53k → 11%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $138k → 16%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF GREATER MADISON: $9k → 10%GIRLS INC AT THE YWCA OF MINNEAPOLIS: $44k → 11%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $137k → 16%GIRLS INC OF GREATER MADISON: $7k → 10%GIRLS INC AT THE YWCA OF MINNEAPOLIS: $33k → 11%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $39k → 16%GIRLS INC OF GREATER MADISON: $6k → 10%GIRLS INC AT THE YWCA OF MINNEAPOLIS: $26k → 11%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $18k → 16%GIRLS INC AT THE YWCA OF MINNEAPOLIS: $14k → 11%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $247k → 10%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $55k → 16%GIRLS INC AT THE YWCA OF MINNEAPOLIS: $12k → 11%GIRLS INC OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $218k → 10%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $48k → 16%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $162k → 10%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $156k → 10%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $155k → 10%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $150k → 10%GIRLS INC OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $108k → 10%GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $82k → 10%GIRLS INC OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $27k → 10%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

NH
MN
IL
WI
NY
MA
OR
SD
IA
IN
PA
CT
CA
CO
NE
MO
KY
VA
MD
DE
NM
AR
TN
DC
AL
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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$45M · 77 repeat orgs$177k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +66% since the first grant, against +51% for those funded once.

77 repeat relationships: 59 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

77
6

Total granted

$45M
$177k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+66%
+51%

Still filing today

86%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Youth DevelopmentHuman ServicesEducationCivil RightsOther
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

  • GI
    GIRLS INCORPORATED OF NEW YORK CITY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +84%
  • TY
    The YouthVantage Alliance
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +59%
  • GI
    GIRLS INC OF GREATER PHILADELPHIA AND SOUTHERN NEW JERSEY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.9M · revenue +206%

Funded once

  • JEANNE GEIGER CRISIS CENTER INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $86k · revenue +79%
  • GI
    Girls Incorporated of the Central Coastgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $63k · revenue +51%
  • GA
    GLADYS ALLEN BRIGHAM COMMUNITY CENTER INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $8k · revenue +80%
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
Girls in Stem
Human Services
2
Simply Girls Incorporated

Serve girls 6-16 through Afterschool and summer enrichment programs. Providing mentorship and encouragement for all girls.

Youth Development
3
Girlsmart Literacy Program
Youth Development
4
Girls Who Read Inc
Education
5
I Am a Girl
International
6
Girls Count
—
7
Girls Inc of Greater Pittsburgh

Girls inc of greater pittsburgh empowers girls to imagine a broader future through a curriculum grounded on female role models delivered by college women mentors, who are themselves mentored by professional women.

Human Services
8
Girls Inc

Girls inc. inspires all girls to be strong, smart, and bold through direct service and advocacy. our programming is delivered to girls in partnership with schools and at our centers across 75 affiliates.

Youth Development
9
Girls Group

Girls group empowers middle and high school women to achieve emotional and economic security by graduating from high school and becoming first generation college graduates. girls group provides year round programming and mentoring to…

Youth Development
10
Girl Talk Inc

We inspire all girls to be confident leaders through peer-to-peer mentoring programs.

—
11
Girls Mentors Girls Inc

Nurtures peer mentoring by encouraging young ladies to share experiences that are helpful to each other. exercising commitment, sisterhood, social skills, and self-awareness

Youth Development
12
Female Strong

Female strong is a 501c3 non-profit organization and a community of committed individuals that offer hands-on programs, mentorship, and experiences that build confidence in middle and high school girls. we support the inclusion of all…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Girls Inc of Greater Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey; the most unlike its peers is Safe Haven of Racine 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

72 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. 72 of the 83 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.

14
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
41
Early backer (in before they grew)
71/72
Grantees still filing
59/72
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GIRLS INC OF GREATER LOS ANGELES: $1,689,067 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INC OF GREATER LOS ANGELESGirls Inc of Greater Atlanta Inc: $1,675,673 · Youth DevelopmentGirls Inc of Greater Atlanta IncGIRLS INC OF CHICAGO: $1,485,661 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INC OF CHICAGOGIRLS INCORPORATED OF BOSTON AND LYNN: $1,456,067 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INCORPORATED OF BOSTON AND LYNNGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SHELBYVILLE SHELBY COUNTY: $1,428,026 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SHELBYVILLE SHELBY COUNTYGIRLS INCORPORATED OF GREATER INDIANAPOLIS: $1,374,185 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INCORPORATED OF GREATER INDIANAPOLISGIRLS INCORPORATED OF METRO DENVER: $1,154,676 · Youth DevelopmentGirls Inc of the Pacific Northwest: $1,065,759 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INCORPORATED OF CENTRAL ALABAMA: $985,424 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA: $812,051 · Youth DevelopmentGirls Incorporated of Greater Houston: $787,987 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INC OF THE VALLEY: $765,072 · Youth Development+29 more: $8,232,647 · Youth Development+29 moreThe YouthVantage Alliance: $2,014,052 · OtherThe YouthVantage AllianceGIRLS INC OF GREATER PHILADELPHIA AND SOUTHERN NEW JERSEY: $1,879,077 · OtherGIRLS INC OF GREATER PHILADELPHIA AND S…GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ORANGE COUNTY: $1,430,515 · OtherGIRLS INCORPORATED OF ORANGE COUNTYGIRLS INCORPORATED OF METROPOLITAN DALLAS: $1,409,232 · OtherGIRLS INCORPORATED OF METROPOLITAN DALL…GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ST LOUIS: $1,351,966 · OtherGIRLS INCORPORATED OF ST LOUISGIRLS INCORPORATED OF MEMPHIS: $989,760 · OtherGIRLS INCORPORATED OF MEMPHISGIRLS INCORPORATED OF KINGSPORT: $895,478 · OtherGIRLS INCORPORATED OF KINGSPORTGIRLS INCORPORATED OF WORCESTER: $823,808 · OtherGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY: $589,115 · OtherGIRLS INCORPORATED OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $567,530 · OtherYOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SYRACUSE AND ONONDAGA COUNTY: $543,691 · OtherGIRLS INCORPORATED OF WAYNE COUNTY: $539,530 · Other+20 more: $2,645,675 · Other+20 moreGIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $1,304,897 · Human ServicesGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $1,004,433 · Human ServicesYWCA OF MINNEAPOLIS: $393,370 · Human ServicesIRWIN A AND ROBERT D GOODMAN COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $350,107 · Human Services+3 more: $264,399 · Human ServicesGIRLS INCORPORATED OF NEW YORK CITY: $2,014,710 · Civil RightsGIRLS INCORPORATED OF LONG ISLAND: $810,032 · EducationGIRLS INCORPORATED OF OWENSBORO-DAV COUNTY: $170,234 · Education
Youth Development$22,912,295Other$15,679,429Human Services$3,317,206Civil Rights$2,014,710Education$980,266

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 budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF NEW YORK CITY: $2,014,710 over 9y, 12% of budgetThe YouthVantage Alliance: $2,014,052 over 9y, 17% of budgetGIRLS INC OF GREATER PHILADELPHIA AND SOUTHERN NEW JERSEY: $1,879,077 over 9y, 25% of budgetGIRLS INC OF GREATER LOS ANGELES: $1,689,067 over 8y, 67% of budgetGirls Inc of Greater Atlanta Inc: $1,675,673 over 9y, 37% of budgetGIRLS INC OF CHICAGO: $1,485,661 over 8y, 32% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF BOSTON AND LYNN: $1,456,067 over 9y, 11% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF ORANGE COUNTY: $1,430,515 over 9y, 8.1% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SHELBYVILLE SHELBY COUNTY: $1,428,026 over 9y, 36% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF METROPOLITAN DALLAS: $1,409,232 over 9y, 15% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF GREATER INDIANAPOLIS: $1,374,185 over 6y, 24% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY: $1,304,897 over 9y, 3.3% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF METRO DENVER: $1,154,676 over 9y, 9.4% of budgetGirls Inc of the Pacific Northwest: $1,065,759 over 9y, 16% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO: $1,004,433 over 9y, 8.1% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF MEMPHIS: $989,760 over 9y, 12% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF CENTRAL ALABAMA: $985,424 over 9y, 9.4% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF KINGSPORT: $895,478 over 9y, 33% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF WORCESTER: $823,808 over 9y, 7.1% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA: $812,051 over 8y, 5.4% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF LONG ISLAND: $810,032 over 9y, 27% of budgetGirls Incorporated of Greater Houston: $787,987 over 9y, 16% of budgetGIRLS INC OF THE VALLEY: $765,072 over 9y, 9.9% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SARASOTA COUNTY: $721,955 over 9y, 7.9% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY: $589,115 over 7y, 52% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF GREATER LOWELL: $583,701 over 9y, 10% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF NEW HAMPSHIRE: $567,530 over 9y, 8.1% of budgetYOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SYRACUSE AND ONONDAGA COUNTY: $543,691 over 9y, 11% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF WAYNE COUNTY: $539,530 over 8y, 22% of budgetGirls Incorporated of Columbus and Phenix-Russell: $537,585 over 9y, 5.4% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF ST LOUIS: $503,299 over 3y, 17% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF SANTA FE INC: $502,402 over 9y, 6.6% of budgetGIRLS INC OF THE GREATER CAPITAL REGION: $499,559 over 9y, 6.3% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF TENNESSEE VALLEY: $496,703 over 9y, 28% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF JACKSONVILLE: $476,649 over 9y, 25% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF THE WASHINGTON DC METRO AREA: $474,344 over 8y, 32% of budgetGIRLS INC OF CHATTANOOGA: $460,708 over 9y, 8.3% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF CARPINTERIA: $454,480 over 9y, 6.1% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF FRANKLIN: $452,489 over 9y, 31% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF PINELLAS: $421,174 over 9y, 13% of budgetYWCA OF MINNEAPOLIS: $393,370 over 9y, 0.5% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF HUNTSVIL: $385,220 over 9y, 22% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF WASHINGTON COUNTY: $366,821 over 9y, 8.3% of budgetIRWIN A AND ROBERT D GOODMAN COMMUNITY CENTER INC: $350,107 over 6y, 2.4% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF JEFFERSON CO: $337,148 over 6y, 34% of budgetGIRLS INC OF JACKSON CO INDIANA INC: $326,176 over 9y, 14% of budgetGIRLS INC OF WESTCHESTER COUNTY: $306,449 over 9y, 16% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF THE ISLAND CITY: $220,012 over 7y, 4.1% 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 GIRLS INCORPORATED OF NEW YORK CITY ↗
  • Who funds The YouthVantage Alliance ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INC OF GREATER PHILADELPHIA AND SOUTHERN NEW JERSEY ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INC OF GREATER LOS ANGELES ↗
  • Who funds Girls Inc of Greater Atlanta Inc ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INC OF CHICAGO ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF BOSTON AND LYNN ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ORANGE COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SHELBYVILLE SHELBY COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF METROPOLITAN DALLAS ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF GREATER INDIANAPOLIS ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ALAMEDA COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF METRO DENVER ↗
  • Who funds Girls Inc of the Pacific Northwest ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN ANTONIO ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF MEMPHIS ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF CENTRAL ALABAMA ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF KINGSPORT ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF WORCESTER ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF OMAHA ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF LONG ISLAND ↗
  • Who funds Girls Incorporated of Greater Houston ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INC OF THE VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SARASOTA COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF GREATER LOWELL ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF NEW HAMPSHIRE ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SYRACUSE AND ONONDAGA COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF WAYNE COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds Girls Incorporated of Columbus and Phenix-Russell ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ST LOUIS ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF SANTA FE INC ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INC OF THE GREATER CAPITAL REGION ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF TENNESSEE VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF JACKSONVILLE ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF THE WASHINGTON DC METRO AREA ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INC OF CHATTANOOGA ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF CARPINTERIA ↗
  • Who funds GIRLS INCORPORATED OF FRANKLIN ↗

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.

Pwc Foundation IncTides FoundationDollar General Litera…American Association …Publix Super Markets …New York Life Foundat…Enterprise Holdings F…Dick's Sporting Goods…The Gap FoundationCharities Aid Foundat…Rite Aid Healthy Futu…Panera Bread Foundati…
Pwc Foundation IncNY44.9× affinity22 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Pwc Foundation Inc · Tides Foundation · Dollar General Literacy Foundation · American Association of University Women Inc · Publix Super Markets Charities Inc · New York Life Foundation · Enterprise Holdings Foundation · Dick's Sporting Goods Foundation · The Gap Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · Rite Aid Healthy Futures · Panera Bread Foundation 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 Girls Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Girls Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 28%
  • Jeanne Geiger Crisis Center Inc: 40% of income from government
  • Gladys Allen Brigham Community Center Inc: 40% of income from government
  • Girls Incorporated of Delaware: 40% of income from government
  • Girls Inc of the Valley: 30% of income from government
  • Girls Incorporated of Boston and Lynn: 28% of income from government
  • Girls Inc of the Pacific Northwest: 4% of income from government
  • Girls Incorporated of Greater Lowell: 3% of income from government
  • Girls Incorporated of Worcester: 2% of income from government
  • Park Central Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
41report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 83 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 Girls’ 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