Skip to content
National Church Residences at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

National Church Residences

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services, and communities for seniors.

$1.1M
Granted FY2025still arriving
20
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$183k
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.

Human Services$17MHousing & Shelter$2.5MArts & Culture$1.9MPublic Safety & Disaster$950kEducation$922kHealth$89k
02FY2025 · 20 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $25k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $174k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $914k
$46,211
Median grant
1
States reached
$242M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WAVERLY CARE CENTER INC (BV HEALTHCARE)$183,060
COMMONS AT SOUTH CUMMINSVILLE$153,370
COMMONS AT LIVINGSTON$108,975
NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES CARE COORDINATION$90,000
COMMONS AT THIRD$84,335
FIRST COMMUNITY VILLAGE$84,296
COMMONS AT BUCKINGHAM$74,382
COMMONS AT GARDEN LAKE$74,267
BRISTOL VILLAGE HOMES$60,840
CHILLICOTHE$46,211
COMMONS AT CHANTRY$28,654
CENTER FOR SENIOR HEALTH$23,409
VILLAGE MANOR$21,088
MAPLE VILLAGE$21,088
LEGACY VILLAGE$17,004
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES SALEM HOUSE MAINEVILLE OH: $105k → 6%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES HOMESTEAD VAN WERT OH: $420k → 9%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES STONE MANOR BEAVERCREEK OH: $105k → 9%TRADITIONS AT CHILLICOTHE: $215k → 14%HOOVER PLACE SENIOR HOUSING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: $200k → 14%WAVERLY CARE CENTER INC (BV HEALTHCARE): $183k → 16%COMMONS AT SOUTH CUMMINSVILLE: $153k → 16%FIRST COMMUNITY VILLAGE: $84k → 14%PORTAGE TRAIL CARE CENTER INC: $73k → 15%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES SOMERSET LANE SOMERSET OH: $170k → 16%COMMONS AT SOUTH CUMMINSVILLE: $77k → 16%TRADITIONS AT MILL RUN: $119k → 15%FIRST COMMUNITY VILLAGE: $334k → 15%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES FOUNDATION: $10.0M → 15%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES HEALTH CARE: $2.4M → 15%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES HEALTH CARE: $1.9M → 15%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES PERMANENT SUPPORT HOUSING SERIVCES: $697k → 15%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES PERMANENT SUPPORT HOUSING SERIVCES: $548k → 15%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES PERMANENT SUPPORT HOUSING SERIVCES: $410k → 15%NORTHLAND GATE: $270k → 15%TELFAIR ARMS SENIOR HOUSING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: $185k → 15%BRISTOL VILLAGE HOMES: $156k → 15%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES HEALTH CARE: $135k → 15%COMMONS AT LIVINGSTON: $109k → 15%COMMONS AT GARDEN LAKE: $107k → 15%COMMONS AT THIRD: $94k → 15%COMMONS AT LIVINGSTON: $94k → 15%COMMONS AT LIVINGSTON: $93k → 15%COMMONS AT GARDEN LAKE: $92k → 15%COMMONS AT BUCKINGHAM: $91k → 15%COMMONS AT GARDEN LAKE: $91k → 15%NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES CARE COORDINATION: $90k → 15%COMMONS AT THIRD: $90k → 15%BIG BETHEL VILLAGE: $88k → 15%COMMONS AT BUCKINGHAM: $86k → 15%COMMONS AT THIRD: $84k → 15%COMMONS AT BUCKINGHAM: $82k → 15%COMMONS AT THIRD: $78k → 15%COMMONS AT LIVINGSTON: $78k → 15%COMMONS AT BUCKINGHAM: $77k → 15%COMMONS AT THIRD: $76k → 15%COMMONS AT THIRD: $76k → 15%COMMONS AT BUCKINGHAM: $74k → 15%COMMONS AT GARDEN LAKE: $74k → 15%COMMONS AT GARDEN LAKE: $74k → 15%COMMONS AT LIVINGSTON: $74k → 15%COMMONS AT BUCKINGHAM: $73k → 15%COMMONS AT BUCKINGHAM: $72k → 15%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.

48%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$11M · 20 repeat orgs$12M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +13% since the first grant, against +12% for those funded once.

20 repeat relationships: 17 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
16

Total granted

$11M
$12M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+12%

Still filing today

55%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $212k 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
Housing & ShelterHealthOther
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

  • NC
    NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES HEALTH CARE
    3× · 2017–2020 · $4.4M · revenue +1%
  • NP
    NCR PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING SERVICE
    5× · 2017–2025 · $1.7M · revenue +118% · 30% of their budget
  • FC
    FIRST COMMUNITY VILLAGE
    2× · 2023–2025 · $418k · revenue +22%

Funded once

  • NC
    NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2022 · $10M · revenue -66% · 30% of their budget
  • NC
    NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES HOMESTEAD VAN WERT OH
    one grant, 2024 · $420k
  • NG
    NORTHLAND GATE
    one grant, 2021 · $270k
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
National Church Residences At Home Central Ohio

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors.

—
2
Ncr At Home Health and Wellness

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors

—
3
National Church Residences Chillicothe Land Holdings Inc

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors

—
4
National Church Residences At Home Inc

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors.

—
5
Traditions At Stygler Road

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors.

—
6
National Church Residences of North Fort Myers Inc

Originating from a christian commitment of service, our mission is to provide high quality care, services and residential communities for all seniors.

—
7
National Church Residences of Rock Hill Sc

Originating from a christian commitment of service, our mission is to provide high quality care, services and residential communities for all seniors.

—
8
First Community Village Foundation

Originating from a Christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for Seniors

—
9
National Church Residences Development Services

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services, and communities for seniors.

Housing & Shelter
10
National Church Residences of Bradenton Fl Inc

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors

—
11
Florida Christian Homes Senior Housing Inc

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors.

Health
12
National Church Residences of Orlando Florida Inc

Originating from a christian commitment of service, our mission is to provide high quality care, services and residential communities for all seniors.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Church Residences At Home Health and Wellness Central Ohio; the most unlike its peers is Bristol Village Homes. 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

26 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. 26 of the 39 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/26
Grantees still filing
20/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES FOUNDATION: $10,000,000 · OtherNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES FOUNDATIONNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES HEALTH CARE: $4,440,000 · OtherNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES HEALTH CARENCR PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING SERVICE: $1,672,000 · OtherNCR PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING SERVICE+33 more: $6,236,682 · Other+33 moreFIRST COMMUNITY VILLAGE: $417,812 · Housing & ShelterNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES: $96,467 · Housing & ShelterPORTAGE TRAIL CARE CENTER INC: $73,339 · Health
Other$22,348,682Housing & Shelter$514,279Health$73,339

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES FOUNDATION: $10,000,000 over 1y, 30% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES HEALTH CARE: $4,440,000 over 3y, 23% of budgetNCR PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING SERVICE: $1,672,000 over 5y, 30% of budgetFIRST COMMUNITY VILLAGE: $417,812 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetTRADITIONS AT CHILLICOTHE: $312,545 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetBRISTOL VILLAGE HOMES: $231,083 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES SOMERSET LANE SOMERSET OH: $170,000 over 1y, 37% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES OF PITTSFORD VERMONT: $164,397 over 8y, 8.2% of budgetTRADITIONS AT MILL RUN: $128,428 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES STONE MANOR BEAVERCREEK OH: $105,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES SALEM HOUSE MAINEVILLE OH: $105,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES OF RUTLAND VT: $104,811 over 6y, 5.0% of budgetTRADITIONS AT XENIA: $101,175 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetTRADITIONS AT WESTERVILLE: $100,827 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES: $96,467 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetPORTAGE TRAIL CARE CENTER INC: $73,339 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES AFFORDABLE HOUSING MGMT & SERVICES: $37,000 over 1y, 100% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES LINCOLN LODGE: $23,608 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES INVESTMENT CORPORATION: $20,959 over 1y, 100% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES AT HOME HEALTH AND WELLNESS CENTRAL OHIO: $11,399 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES TRANSPORTATION SERVICES LLC: $9,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetNATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES AT HOME HOSPICE CENTRAL OHIO: $6,125 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

National Church Resid…
National Church Residences FoundationOH13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Church Residences 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 National Church Residences funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from National Church Residences. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 39 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 National Church Residences’ 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