Skip to content
Pacific Retirement Services Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Pacific Retirement Services Inc

Pacific retirement services' mission is to empower people to lead meaningful lives as they age.

$600k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$600k
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$14MEmployment$19k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$600,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$80M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CAPITOL LAKES INC$600,000
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 (FY17–25, $1.8M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%UNIVERSITY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT DAVIS: $124k → 16%THE CUMBERLAND REST INC: $150k → 11%CAPITOL LAKES INC: $600k → 10%HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA: $91k → 12%ROGUE VALLEY MANOR: $230k → 13%CASCADE MANOR INC: $59k → 15%UNIVERSITY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT DAVIS: $121k → 16%THE CUMBERLAND REST INC: $123k → 11%HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA: $87k → 12%CASCADE MANOR INC: $47k → 15%UNIVERSITY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT DAVIS: $60k → 16%THE CUMBERLAND REST INC: $57k → 11%HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA: $51k → 12%CASCADE MANOR INC: $29k → 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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$14M · 7 repeat orgs$951k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +37% since the first grant, against +23% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
2

Total granted

$14M
$351k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%
+23%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $600k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’23’24’25
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterEmploymentOther
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

  • MA
    MIRABELLA AT ASU INC
    3× · 2018–2020 · $13M · revenue +45% · 100% of their budget
  • TC
    THE CUMBERLAND REST INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $330k · revenue +76%
  • MA
    MIRABELLA AT SOUTH WATERFRONT
    4× · 2017–2020 · $317k · revenue +24%

Funded once

  • RV
    ROGUE VALLEY MANOR
    2× · 2019–2020 · $230k · revenue +23%
  • M
    MIRABELLA
    2× · 2019–2020 · $121k · revenue +16%
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
Christian Care Retirement Apartments Inc

Through christian love and excellence, we are dedicated to providing a fulfilling lifestyle and promoting independence to those we serve

—
2
La Vida Llena

La vida llena will provide residents an enhanced personalized lifestyle and is a community that enhances the life of seniors in a safe premier living environment that fosters excellent services by a caring staff.

—
3
Meadow Lake Llc

Creating communities celebrating the lives of seniors. lifespace recognizes that its mission can only be fulfilled through the dedicated efforts of its employees, therefore, included in our mission is the ability to provide disaster relief…

Human Services
4
Bay Area Senior Services Inc

To provide care and housing for the elderly.

Housing & Shelter
5
Carmel Residence Inc

Carmel residence, inc., is part of a family of healthcare and residential service organizations committed to providing quality care and life enriching opportunities to the aging and those in need of a caring, christian environment.

Housing & Shelter
6
Christian Care Mesa Ii Inc

Through christian love and excellence, we are dedicated to providing a fulfilling lifestyle and promoting independence to those we serve.

Housing & Shelter
7
Kendal At Ithaca Inc

Our mission is to provide a mutually supportive environment for residents and staff, and to contribute to the greater ithaca community.

Human Services
8
Wrc Pennsylvania Memorial Home

Wrc pennsylvania memorial home's mission is to provide choices for generations. built on a not-for-profit foundation of caring, the organization offers residential and personal care, home and community-based services, skilled and…

Health
9
Christian Care Mesa Inc

Through christian love and excellence, we are dedicated to providing a fulfilling lifestyle and promoting independence to those we serve.

Human Services
10
Canterbury Tower Inc

The organization's mission is to provide housing, health care, and other personal services to elderly residents through the operation of a continuing care retirement community in tampa, florida.

—
11
Northwest Senior Housing Corporation

Creating communities celebrating the lives of seniors. lifespace recognizes that its mission can only be fulfilled through the dedicated efforts of its employees, therefore, included in our mission is the ability to provide disaster relief…

—
12
Central Columbia Senior Living

To develop, own, lease and manage assisted living facilities, retirement apartments, boarding homes and similar undertakings intended to care for aged and infirm residents.

Housing & Shelter
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mirabella At South Waterfront; the most unlike its peers is Leadingage 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

10 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
10/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MIRABELLA AT ASU INC: $12,505,873 · Housing & ShelterMIRABELLA AT ASU INC+2 more: $438,460 · Housing & ShelterCAPITOL LAKES INC: $600,000 · Human ServicesCAPITOL LAKES …THE CUMBERLAND REST INC: $330,421 · Human ServicesTHE CUMBERLAND…UNIVERSITY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT DAVIS: $306,059 · Human ServicesUNIVERSITY RET…ROGUE VALLEY MANOR: $229,704 · Human ServicesROGUE VALLEY M…HOLLADAY PARK PLAZA: $229,316 · Human ServicesHOLLADAY PARK …CASCADE MANOR INC: $134,574 · Human ServicesCASCADE MANOR …LEADINGAGE CALIFORNIA: $19,000 · Employment
Housing & Shelter$12,944,333Human Services$1,830,074Employment$19,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMIRABELLA AT ASU INC: $12,505,873 over 3y, 100% of budgetCAPITOL LAKES INC: $600,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetTHE CUMBERLAND REST INC: $330,421 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetMIRABELLA AT SOUTH WATERFRONT: $317,146 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetUNIVERSITY RETIREMENT COMMUNITY AT DAVIS: $306,059 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetROGUE VALLEY MANOR: $229,704 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetHOLLADAY PARK PLAZA: $229,316 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetCASCADE MANOR INC: $134,574 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetMIRABELLA: $121,314 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetLEADINGAGE CALIFORNIA: $19,000 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Pacific Retirement Services Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Pacific Retirement Services Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 30%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Holladay Park Plaza: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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 10 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 Pacific Retirement Services’ 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