Skip to content
Seniorage Area Agency on Aging at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Seniorage Area Agency on Aging

A federally designated Area Agency on Aging whose mission is to bring independence enhancing supportive services to the 60+ population and their caregivers in our 17 county-wide service area.

$2.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
23
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$382k
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Human Services$4.4MHealth$2.4MPublic Safety & Disaster$1.2MFood & Nutrition$892kPublic Benefit$568kReligion$511kCrime & Legal$311kArts & Culture$8k
02FY2025 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 23 grants below total $1,691,805, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,555,936 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $864,131 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $26k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $182k
  • $50k–250k12 grants · $1.1M
  • $250k+1 grant · $382k
$61,302
Median grant
2
States reached
$8.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Show Me Systems Lifeline$382,165
Grace Health Services$220,800
OATS Inc$116,365
Mountain Grove$107,000
City of Mountain View$92,000
Council of Churches of the Ozarks$89,360
CoxHealth at Home$74,885
Ava Senior Center$72,560
Dade County Senior Citizens$72,549
Integrity Home Care$69,337
Legal Services of Southern Missouri$65,255
On The Go$61,302
Forsyth Senior Center$60,200
Willow Springs Senior Center$46,500
SMTS Inc$39,502
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 (FY20–25, $2.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%On The Go: $546k → 11%OATS Inc: $138k → 17%Dade County Senior Citizens: $73k → 18%Ava Senior Center: $73k → 19%On The Go: $291k → 11%OATS Inc: $137k → 17%Dade County Senior Citizens: $65k → 18%Ava Senior Center: $66k → 19%On The Go: $147k → 11%OATS Inc: $137k → 17%Dade County Senior Citizens: $55k → 18%Ava Senior Center: $61k → 19%On The Go: $61k → 11%OATS Inc: $128k → 17%Dade County Senior Citizens: $24k → 18%Ava Senior Center: $48k → 19%OATS Inc: $128k → 17%OATS Inc: $116k → 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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$10M · 29 repeat orgs$235k to everyone else

29 repeat relationships: 20 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

29
4

Total granted

$10M
$120k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+37%

Still filing today

34%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $115k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthPublic BenefitArts & CultureOther
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

  • CA
    CHARITABLE ADULT RIDES & SERVICES
    4× · 2022–2025 · $1.0M · revenue +1%
  • OI
    OATS INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $785k · revenue +22%
  • LS
    Legal Services of Southern Missouri
    6× · 2020–2025 · $311k · revenue +55%

Funded once

  • CO
    City of Mountain View
    one grant, 2022 · $79k
  • 4H
    417 Home Care LLC
    one grant, 2020 · $20k
  • CM
    Citizens Memorial Health Care Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $14k · revenue +37%
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
Jackson County Council On Aging

Provide services to local seniors to improve their quality of life and assist them in remaining in their homes

Human Services
2
Southside Senior Citizen Center

Adults day care

Human Services
3
Ozark Senior Center

Providing services to Seniors

—
4
South Royalton Senior Center

Provides meals and services to senior citizens of the comunity and surrounding towns

—
5
Sixty Plus Club of Sh Co Ks Inc

Senior center

—
6
Nicholas County Senior Center
Food & Nutrition
7
Davenport Senior Citizens

Meals for elderly

Human Services
8
Aging Services for Communities

Provide assistance for the elderly, frail and disabled in le sueur county and surrounding counties.

Human Services
9
Harlan County Senior Services Inc

Offers programs & services to older persons such as meals, house keeping, yard work, public transportation, and social activities.

Human Services
10
Seniorage Area Agency On Aging

A federally designated Area Agency on Aging whose mission is to bring independence enhancing supportive services to the 60+ population and their caregivers in our 17 county-wide service area.

Human Services
11
Sherman County Senior Center Inc

To offer a nutrition program for older persons.

—
12
Council On Aging & Human Services

Enhancing lives and building communities by providing transportation and nutrition services.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Citizens Memorial Health Care Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Dade County Senior Citizens Center. 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

13 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 36 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
9/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Show Me Systems Lifeline: $1,206,240 · OtherShow Me Systems LifelineGrace Health Services: $935,173 · OtherGrace Health ServicesCity of Mountain Grove: $695,017 · OtherCity of Mountain GroveCOUNCIL OF CHURCHES OF THE OZARKS INC: $511,413 · OtherCOUNCIL OF CHURCHES OF THE OZARKS INCAccess In-Home & Community Services: $489,191 · OtherAccess In-Home & Community ServicesIntegrity Health Care: $446,138 · OtherIntegrity Health CareCity of Mountain View: $352,125 · OtherPhoenix Home Care Inc: $330,965 · OtherLegal Services of Southern Missouri: $310,532 · OtherSENIOR CITIZENS OF MOUNTAN VIEW MISSOURI INC: $252,000 · Other+16 more: $1,152,876 · Other+16 moreCHARITABLE ADULT RIDES & SERVICES: $1,045,309 · Human ServicesCHARITABLE ADULT RIDES & …OATS INC: $784,647 · Human ServicesOATS INCDOUGLAS COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $246,738 · Human ServicesDOUGLAS COUNTY COUNCIL ON…DADE COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER: $217,034 · Human ServicesDADE COUNTY SENIOR CITIZE…Healthcare Services of the Ozarks Inc: $980,020 · HealthHealthcare S…OZARKS MEDICAL CENTER: $120,037 · HealthOZARKS MEDIC…+2 more: $39,647 · HealthSOUTHEAST MISSOURI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES INC: $231,393 · Public BenefitEBENEZER HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $8,400 · Arts & Culture
Other$6,681,670Human Services$2,293,728Health$1,139,704Public Benefit$231,393Arts & Culture$8,400

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 budgetCHARITABLE ADULT RIDES & SERVICES: $1,045,309 over 4y, 2.6% of budgetHealthcare Services of the Ozarks Inc: $980,020 over 6y, 2.3% of budgetOATS INC: $784,647 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetLegal Services of Southern Missouri: $310,532 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetSENIOR CITIZENS OF MOUNTAN VIEW MISSOURI INC: $252,000 over 3y, 75% of budgetDOUGLAS COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING: $246,738 over 4y, 72% of budgetSOUTHEAST MISSOURI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES INC: $231,393 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetOZARKS MEDICAL CENTER: $120,037 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetSUMMERSVILLE SENIOR CENTER: $111,742 over 2y, 41% of budgetSENIOR FRIENDSHIP SITE: $60,200 over 1y, 10% of budgetFREEMAN HEALTH SYSTEM: $25,991 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCitizens Memorial Health Care Foundation: $13,656 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds CHARITABLE ADULT RIDES & SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds Healthcare Services of the Ozarks Inc ↗
  • Who funds OATS INC ↗
  • Who funds Legal Services of Southern Missouri ↗
  • Who funds SENIOR CITIZENS OF MOUNTAN VIEW MISSOURI INC ↗
  • Who funds DOUGLAS COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING ↗
  • Who funds SOUTHEAST MISSOURI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES INC ↗
  • Who funds OZARKS MEDICAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds SUMMERSVILLE SENIOR CENTER ↗
  • Who funds SENIOR FRIENDSHIP SITE ↗
  • Who funds FREEMAN HEALTH SYSTEM ↗
  • Who funds Citizens Memorial Health Care Foundation ↗
  • Who funds EBENEZER HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗

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.

Community Foundation …Ozarks Food Harvest I…Area Agency on Aging …Mfa Oil FoundationAmazonsmile Foundation
Community Foundation of the Ozarks IncMO24.1× affinity10 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of the Ozarks Inc · Ozarks Food Harvest Inc · Area Agency on Aging Region X · Mfa Oil Foundation · 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 Seniorage Area Agency on Aging funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Seniorage Area Agency on Aging. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%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
    8report 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 36 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 Seniorage Area Agency on 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