Skip to content
Provider Services Fund at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Provider Services Fund

To increase the sustainability of work in the caregiving economy and supporting professional development of caregivers.

$1.3M
Granted FY2025still arriving
29
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$180k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2025.

Human Services$4.0MEducation$24k
02FY2025 · 29 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k11 grants · $108k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $203k
  • $50k–250k11 grants · $946k
$29,865
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BEE'S CARE LLC$179,600
CHILDSPACE$89,800
SHANNON'S CHILD CARE AND PRESCHOOL$89,800
LITTLE ROOTS PRESCHOOL LLC$89,800
PLAY AND LEARN TOGETHER II LLC$87,773
PEQUENAS ESTRELLAS GIGANTES$85,080
El Jardin Del Arcoiris$84,800
GUILDED GROWTH EARLY LEARNING LLC$71,456
BRIGHT START DAYCARE$56,701
ABC KIDS ZONE DAYCARE$56,000
BUCKLE MY SHOE CHILDCARE LLC$54,911
MISS JENN'S CHILDCARE AND PRESCHOOL LLC$42,339
Milas Playhouse$40,000
PEQUELANDIA$36,264
ACE DAYCARE$29,865
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 (FY23–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Play and Learn Together LLC: $24k → 8%BEE'S CARE LLC: $180k → 8%Tami's Little Friends LLC: $90k → 11%Santa Enterprises LLC: $28k → 12%Simply Kids Preschool: $90k → 13%Dina's Child Care: $28k → 14%Lumi's Day Care: $24k → 16%Little Peoples Childcare: $52k → 8%Mini Miracles Daycare: $31k → 10%LITTLE ROOTS PRESCHOOL LLC: $90k → 11%Caritas Felices Daycare LLC: $24k → 12%123 All About me Daycare: $99k → 13%Vidal Daycare and Preschool: $48k → 13%Lulu's Daycare: $24k → 14%MISS JENN'S CHILDCARE AND PRESCHOOL LLC: $42k → 18%Pequenos Girasoles Daycare: $24k → 8%Preescolar Dar Care Jalisco LLC: $24k → 13%Canyon Kids Child Care: $34k → 13%Arce's Daycare: $24k → 14%Itsy Bitsy Daycare LLC: $28k → 8%SHANNON'S CHILD CARE AND PRESCHOOL: $90k → 8%La Escuelita Bilingue LLC: $90k → 13%Amazon Creek Preschool: $24k → 15%Casa Feliz Childcare LLC: $104k → 12%Little Smiles Bilingual Daycare LLC: $24k → 15%PLAY AND LEARN TOGETHER II LLC: $88k → 8%PEQUELANDIA: $36k → 12%Angels Daycare Corp: $24k → 15%Pequenitos Childcare Spanish Immersion: $43k → 12%Victoria's Daycare: $40k → 14%Karys Home Daycare: $43k → 14%Almost Mom Childcare: $35k → 15%CHILDSPACE: $90k → 12%PEQUENAS ESTRELLAS GIGANTES: $85k → 14%Learning Days Inc: $71k → 8%El Jardin Del Arcoiris: $85k → 14%Juguemos Juntos Daycare LLC: $59k → 8%Reyna's Daycare: $66k → 14%ABC KIDS ZONE DAYCARE: $56k → 8%GUILDED GROWTH EARLY LEARNING LLC: $71k → 15%BUCKLE MY SHOE CHILDCARE LLC: $55k → 8%BRIGHT START DAYCARE: $57k → 14%Miliat Kasahun: $90k → 12%Sierra's Safari Childcare: $80k → 8%Casa Feliz Childcare: $48k → 12%Milas Playhouse: $47k → 8%Milas Playhouse: $40k → 8%ACE DAYCARE: $30k → 8%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.

15%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$619k · 9 repeat orgs$3.4M to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down; 20 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
92

Total granted

$619k
$2.4M

Still filing today

0%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 25% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $937k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • 1A
    123 All About me Daycare
    2× · 2024–2025 · $118k
  • EJ
    El Jardin Del Arcoiris
    2× · 2024–2025 · $102k
  • GG
    GUILDED GROWTH EARLY LEARNING LLC
    2× · 2023–2025 · $91k

Funded once

  • CF
    Casa Feliz Childcare LLC
    one grant, 2024 · $104k
  • SK
    Simply Kids Preschool
    one grant, 2024 · $90k
  • MK
    Miliat Kasahun
    one grant, 2024 · $90k
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
04the grantee network

0 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2023–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2023 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 0 of the 121 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
0/0
Grantees still filing
0/0
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BEE'S CARE LLC: $179,600 · Other+120 more: $3,818,824 · Other+120 more
Other$3,998,424

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

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their 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.

Micro Enterprise Serv…Seeding Justice
Micro Enterprise Services of OregonOR19.9× affinity8 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Micro Enterprise Services of Oregon · Seeding Justice

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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Provider Services Fund?

Find your warmest path to Provider Services Fund through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

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 121 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 Provider 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