Skip to content
New York Integrated Network for Persons With Developmental Disabilities at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

New York Integrated Network for Persons With Developmental Disabilities

The purpose is to become a sustainable network with an integrated system with multiple services and supports that will develop new and innovated models of care, utilize best practices, stablize quality of service and demonstrate effective and efficient delivery of care for people with multiple disabilities including physical and mental…

$780k
Granted FY2022
8
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$98k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2022 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$97,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BIRCH FAMILY SERVICES$97,500
ACCESS SUPPORTS FOR LIVING INC$97,500
HEARTSHARE HUMAN SERVICES OF NEW YORK$97,500
HUMAN CARE SERVICES FOR FAMILY AND CHILDREN INC$97,500
LIFESPIRE INC$97,500
SERVICES FOR THE UNDERSERVED INC$97,500
UNITED CEREBRAL PALSY ASSOCIATIONS OF NEW YORK STATE INC$97,500
THE INSTITUTES OF APPLIED HUMAN DYNAMICS INC$97,500
02The need
02

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 (FY22–22, $488k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 80% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%THE INSTITUTES OF APPLIED HUMAN DYNAMICS INC: $98k → 9%ACCESS SUPPORTS FOR LIVING INC: $98k → 14%HEARTSHARE HUMAN SERVICES OF NEW YORK: $98k → 20%BIRCH FAMILY SERVICES: $98k → 17%LIFESPIRE INC: $98k → 17%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 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
Nysarc Inc New York City Chapter

We are committed to helping people with intellectual (cont. on schedule o) and developmental disabilities to live full lives.

Human Services
2
Barc Developmental Services Inc

To serve and advocate for people with intellectual disabilities and autism.

—
3
Center for Developmental Disabilities

The center's mission is to help children and adults with differing abilities achieve their dreams by overcoming barriers to living, working, learning & enjoying recreational opportunities in the community of their choice.

Human Services
4
Accesscny Inc

Accesscny offers personcentered services that empower individuals of all ages and abilities to reach their full potential as part of our shared community. services are provided with dedication, compassion, innovation, and commitment. the…

Health
5
Northeast Arc Inc

Helping adults and children with disabilities, (incl asd), become full participants in the community.

—
6
Threshold Rehabilitation Services Inc

The mission of threshold, inc. is to enhance the quality of life of persons with disabilities and the economically disadvantaged by providing opportunities to achieve total integration into their community through vocational…

Employment
7
The Arc of Union County Inc

To empower and support people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their families. this organization will utilize all its resources to ensure that our individuals served, their families and all people with intellectual and…

—
8
Everas Community Services Inc

The mission of the agency is to provide innovative services that support independence and community inclusion. everas provides comprehensive, lifetime services that meet their potential for independence, and improve their quality of life.…

Human Services
9
A-1 Universal Care Inc

Comprehensive and quality services and support for children and adults with intellectual and other development disabilities.

—
10
Adults and Children With Learning and Developmental Disabilities Inc

Acld's mission is to provide opportunities for children and adults with autism, learning and developmental disabilities to pursue enviable lives, promote independence and foster supportive relationships within the community.

Human Services
11
Progress Unlimited Inc

To empower individuals to lead fulfilling and productive lives at home and in the community.

Human Services
12
Developmental Disabilities Institute Inc

We help children and adults with autism and other developmental disabilities experience personal growth and fulfillment.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Lifespire Inc; the most unlike its peers is Services for the Underserved. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BIRCH FAMILY SERVICES INC: $97,500 · Human ServicesBIRCH FAMILY SERVICES INCTHE INSTITUTES OF APPLIED HUMAN DYNAMICS: $97,500 · Human ServicesTHE INSTITUTES OF APPLIED HUMAN DYNAMICSLIFESPIRE INC: $97,500 · Human ServicesLIFESPIRE INCHEARTSHARE HUMAN SERVICES OF NEW YORK: $97,500 · Human ServicesHEARTSHARE HUMAN SERVICES OF NEW YORKACCESS SUPPORTS FOR LIVING INC: $97,500 · Human ServicesACCESS SUPPORTS FOR LIVING INCUNITED CEREBRAL PALSY ASSOCIATIONS OF NEW YORK STATE INC: $97,500 · HealthUNITED CEREBRAL PALSY ASSOCIATIONS OF NEW …Services For The Underserved: $97,500 · HealthServices For The UnderservedHUMAN CARE SERVICES FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN INC: $97,500 · HealthHUMAN CARE SERVICES FOR FAMILIES & CHILDRE…
Human Services$487,500Health$292,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUNITED CEREBRAL PALSY ASSOCIATIONS OF NEW YORK STATE INC: $97,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBIRCH FAMILY SERVICES INC: $97,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE INSTITUTES OF APPLIED HUMAN DYNAMICS: $97,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLIFESPIRE INC: $97,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHUMAN CARE SERVICES FOR FAMILIES & CHILDREN INC: $97,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHEARTSHARE HUMAN SERVICES OF NEW YORK: $97,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetACCESS SUPPORTS FOR LIVING INC: $97,500 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.

Amazonsmile Foundation
Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 New York Integrated Network for Persons With Developmental Disabilities funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from New York Integrated Network for Persons With Developmental Disabilities. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 8 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 2022, released 2022. 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 FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on New York Integrated Network for Persons With Developmental Disabilities’ 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