How much does Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc give?

Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc reported 33 grants totaling $5,544,773 in its FY2025 IRS filing. It funded between 31 and 38 organizations a year over FY2018 to FY2024.

What does Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc fund?

By grant dollars over FY2017 to FY2025, its largest causes are Food & Nutrition (87%), Public Benefit (6%), Human Services (3%).

Who are Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2017 to FY2025: Butler County Council on Aging Inc ($3.9M), Southeast Missouri Transportation Services Inc ($3.0M), Cape Girardeau Council on Aging ($2.8M).

Does Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc fund new organizations?

In FY2024, 3% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.

Which funders back the same organizations as Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Southeast Missouri Food Bank Inc, Community Foundation of the Ozarks Inc, Amazonsmile Foundation.

Where is Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc based?

Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc is based in MO.

Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc

Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc at a glance Also receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc

Develop a coordinated delivery system of services to assist and enable older missourians to remain in their homes and enhance their quality of life.

$5.5M

Granted FY2025still arriving

Grants FY2025still arriving

States reached

$465k

Largest

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.

Food & Nutrition$45MPublic Benefit$3.0MHuman Services$1.4MHealth$1.4MCrime & Legal$500kCommunity Improvement$296kEducation$51k

02FY2025 · 33 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

$10k–50k3 grants · $100k
$50k–250k26 grants · $3.9M
$250k+4 grants · $1.5M

$162,680

Median grant

States reached

$5.7M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
BUTLER COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING	$464,535
SOUTHEAST MISSOURI TRANSPORTATION	$455,000
CAPE GIRARDEAU COUNCIL ON AGING	$315,044
CITY OF PARK HILLS MISSOURI	$257,102
SENIOR SERVICES OF CHAFFEE MO INC	$245,596
EAST MISSOURI ACTION AGENCY INC	$219,711
RIPLEY COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS CLUB	$213,480
CHARLESTON NUTRITION CENTER INC	$210,923
STODDARD COUNTY SENIOR CITIZENS	$208,727
CARTER COUNTY SENIOR CENTER	$201,581
THE EAST PRAIRIE NUTRITION CENTER	$183,645
WILLIAMSVILLE AREA ASSOCIATION OF AGING	$178,214
CITY OF BONNE TERRE MISSOURI	$175,224
JACKSON SENIOR CENTER INC	$173,576
STE GENEVIEVE GOLDEN AGE CLUB	$172,894

02The need

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, $15.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.

$52M · 40 repeat orgs$126k to everyone else

40 repeat relationships: 32 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$52M

$31k

Still filing today

65%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $95k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesFood & NutritionPublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementHealthOther

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

BC
BUTLER COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC
9× · 2017–2025 · $3.9M · revenue +42% · 84% of their budget
SM
SOUTHEAST MISSOURI TRANSPORTATION SERVICES INC
9× · 2017–2025 · $3.0M · revenue +35%
SS
SENIOR SERVICES OF CHAFFEE MO INC
9× · 2017–2025 · $2.4M · revenue +15% · 84% of their budget

Funded once

RH
RESCARE HOME CARE
one grant, 2018 · $31k

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.

Sherman County Senior Center Inc

To offer a nutrition program for older persons.

—

Washington County Senior Services Inc

To provide congregate meals, home delivered meals, transportation, and information and assistance to senior citizens of washington county, illinois.

—

Platte Senior Services Inc

Provide meals,transportation and social interaction opportunities for senior citizens living in platte county missouri

Human Services

Schuyler County Council On Aging Nutrition Site

Provide affordable and free meals to senior citizens

Human Services

Senior Citizens of Mountan View Missouri Inc

Provide food service and other social services to senior citizens

—

Posey County Council On Aging Inc

Services for senior citizens of posey county, indiana

Human Services

Harrison County Council On Aging

Provide services & meals to the elderly.

Human Services

Shelley Area Senior Citizens Inc

To provide transportation and meals for seniors, including home delivery

Human Services

Dillon County Council On Aging

Provides senior center and congregate and home delivered meals, homemaker services allowing seniors to remain in their homes.

Human Services

Warren Senior Center

Community senior centerprovide meals to senior citizens & homebound citizens

Human Services

Kosciusko County Council On Aging and Aged Inc

To provide services and resources to the aged citizens of kosciusko county indiana and surrounding areas including transportation, mobile meals, and senior activities to improve quality of life

—

Gonzales County Senior Citizens Association Inc

Provide home delivered meals and transportation services free of charge

Food & Nutrition

How this is measured

The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Madison County Senior Citizens Council On Aging; the most unlike its peers is Stoddard County Transit Services Inc. 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

28 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. 28 of the 42 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

27/28

Grantees still filing

22/28

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Other$28,632,894Human Services$15,645,166Food & Nutrition$3,469,465Public Benefit$2,955,945Community Improvement$862,028Health$252,039

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

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.

Southeast Missouri Food Bank IncMO34.3× affinity14 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Southeast Missouri Food Bank Inc · Community Foundation of the Ozarks Inc · 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 Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Southeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

21report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%

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.

Play a game based on Southeast Missouri 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