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

· Public charity

Grantmakers in Aging Inc

Gia is a membership association of funders mobilizing money and ideas to strengthen policies, programs, and resources for all of us as we age.

$314k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
10
States reached
$169k
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 2024.

Human Services$635kHealth$199kCommunity Improvement$45kScience & Tech$26k
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k9 grants · $145k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $169k
$15,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$3.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR CAREGIVING$168,666
UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS BOSTON$25,000
NEW YORK STATE CAREGIVING AND RESPITE$15,000
HAWAII FAMILY CAREGIVER COALITION$15,000
FAMILY CAREGIVER COLLABORATIVE(UTAH)$15,000
ARIZONA CAREGIVER COALITION$15,000
SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN SENIOR REGIONAL COLLABORATIVE$15,000
AGEOPTIONS$15,000
WISCONSIN AGING ADVOCACY NETWORK$15,000
HEALTH SCIENCES HEALTH INNOVATIONS GROUP$15,000
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 (FY22–24, $483k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 90% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ARIZONA CAREGIVER COALITION: $15k → 11%AGING SERVICES COUNCIL OF CENTRAL TEXAS: $15k → 10%NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR CAREGIVING: $169k → 14%SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN SENIOR REGIONAL COLLABORATIVE: $15k → 21%NORTH CAROLINA COALITION ON AGING: $15k → 8%AGEOPTIONS: $15k → 14%ARIZONA CAREGIVER COALITION: $15k → 11%AGING SERVICES COUNCIL OF CENTRAL TEXAS: $8k → 10%NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR CAREGIVING: $154k → 14%SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN SENIOR REGIONAL COLLABORATIVE: $15k → 21%NORTH CAROLINA COALITION ON AGING: $8k → 8%AGEOPTIONS: $15k → 14%ARIZONA CAREGIVER COALITION: $8k → 11%SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN SENIOR REGIONAL COLLABORATIVE: $8k → 21%AGEOPTIONS: $8k → 14%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

IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
SD
CA
UT
AZ
NC
SC
DC
HI
TX
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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$712k · 11 repeat orgs$150k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
2

Total granted

$712k
$135k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+22%

Still filing today

64%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’22’23’24
Human ServicesHealthCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • NA
    NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR CAREGIVING
    2× · 2023–2024 · $323k · revenue +71%
  • AI
    AGEOPTIONS INC (FKA SUBURBAN AREA AGENCY ON AGING)
    3× · 2022–2024 · $38k · revenue +27%
  • GW
    GREATER WISCONSIN AGENCY ON AGING RESOURCES INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $38k · revenue +6%

Funded once

  • CC
    COMMUNITY CATALYST INC
    one grant, 2022 · $90k · revenue -43%
  • GS
    GROW SOUTH DAKOTA
    one grant, 2017 · $45k · revenue +22%
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
South Dakota Health Care Association

To provide excellence in support services to all south dakota long term care facilities. to fulfill this mission, the south dakota health care association provides demonstrated leadership in education, information, networking partnerships,…

—
2
Agency On Aging of South Central Connecticut

The organization's mission is to champion and serve older adults and individuals with disabilities so that they remain independent and engaged within their communities.

—
3
American Health Care Association

Improving lives by delivering solutions for quality care.

—
4
Ageguide Northeastern Illinois Area On Aging

We strive to make aging easier through the development of a network of services for older persons designed to optimize the quality of their lives.

Food & Nutrition
5
Central Minnesota Council On Aging Inc

The central minnesota council on aging is committed to maintaining the highest level of independence with older people by developing and coordinating community care, reducing isolation and improving access to services.

Human Services
6
Agespan Inc

To ensure everyone's choice to lead fulfilling lives as they age.

Human Services
7
Community Care Health Plan Inc

Community care health plan's mission is to develop and demonstrate innovative, flexible, community-based approaches to care for at-risk adults, in order to optimize their quality of life and optimize the allocation of community resources.

Health
8
American College of Health Care Administrators

The american college of health care administrators (achca) is the catalyst for excellence in post-acute and aging services leadership.

Health
9
Leadingage North Carolina

Through advocacy, education, innovation and collaboration, the association provides expanded possibilities for aging, value to its members, and leadership to the field of aging.

Human Services
10
Capital Area Agency On Aging Inc

The agency's mission is to advocate and provide services to enhance the quality of life for older adults.

Human Services
11
Southern California University of Health Sciences

The mission of southern california university of health sciences (scu) is to educate students as competent, caring and successful practitioners of integrative healthcare. the university is committed to providing excellence in academics,…

Education
12
Usaging

Usaging represents & supports the national network of area agencies on aging & advocates for the title vi native american aging programs that help older adults & people with disabilities live with optimal health, well-being, independence &…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Alliance for Caregiving; the most unlike its peers is University of Southern California. 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

11 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. 11 of the 15 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR CAREGIVING: $322,666 · Human ServicesNATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR CAREGIVINGAGEOPTIONS INC (FKA SUBURBAN AREA AGENCY ON AGING): $38,000 · Human ServicesAGEOPTIONS INC (FKA SUBURBAN AREA AGENCY ON AGING)ARIZONA CAREGIVER COALITION INC: $38,000 · Human ServicesARIZONA CAREGIVER COALITION INCSOUTHEAST MICHIGAN SENIOR REGIONAL COLLABORATIVE: $38,000 · Human ServicesSOUTHEAST MICHIGAN SENIOR REGIONAL COLLABORATIVEAUSTIN GROUPS FOR THE ELDERLY: $23,000 · Human ServicesNORTH CAROLINA COALITION ON AGING: $23,000 · Human ServicesUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS: $77,608 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTSGREATER WISCONSIN AGENCY ON AGING RESOURCES INC: $38,000 · OtherGREATER WISCONSIN AGENCY ON …NEW YORK STATE CAREGIVING AND RESPITE: $38,000 · OtherNEW YORK STATE CAREGIVING AN…UNIVERSITY OF UTAH: $38,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF UTAHHAWAII FAMILY CAREGIVER COALITION: $38,000 · OtherHAWAII FAMILY CAREGIVER COAL…COMMUNITY CATALYST INC: $90,048 · HealthCOMMUNITY CAT…Health Sciences South Carolina: $15,000 · HealthHealth Scienc…GROW SOUTH DAKOTA: $45,000 · Community ImprovementUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $43,000 · Education
Human Services$482,666Other$229,608Health$105,048Community Improvement$45,000Education$43,000

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 budgetNATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR CAREGIVING: $322,666 over 2y, 6.3% of budgetCOMMUNITY CATALYST INC: $90,048 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetGROW SOUTH DAKOTA: $45,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $43,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAGEOPTIONS INC (FKA SUBURBAN AREA AGENCY ON AGING): $38,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetGREATER WISCONSIN AGENCY ON AGING RESOURCES INC: $38,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetARIZONA CAREGIVER COALITION INC: $38,000 over 3y, 5.3% of budgetSOUTHEAST MICHIGAN SENIOR REGIONAL COLLABORATIVE: $38,000 over 3y, 3.5% of budgetAUSTIN GROUPS FOR THE ELDERLY: $23,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetNORTH CAROLINA COALITION ON AGING: $23,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetHealth Sciences South Carolina: $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

National Council on A…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Council on Aging IncVA13.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Council on Aging Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Grantmakers in Aging Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Grantmakers in Aging Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 15%
  • Community Catalyst Inc: 15% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
2report 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 15 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Grantmakers in 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