· Public charity
Tennessee Chapter of Children's Advocacy
To promote, assist, and support the development, growth, and sustainability of child advocacy centers in their service to at-risk, abused, and neglected children and their families.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $9k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $93k
- $50k–250k22 grants · $2.4M
- $250k+3 grants · $1.3M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EXCHANGE CLUB-CARL PERKINS CENTER FOR THE PREVENTION OF CHILD ABUSE | $457,111 |
| MEMPHIS CAC | $441,851 |
| NASHVILLE CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE | $398,609 |
| CHILDHELP CHILDREN'S CENTER OF EAST TENNESSEE | $222,221 |
| THE HOPE CENTER INC (10TH DISTRICT JUDICIAL CAC CLEVELAND CENTER) | $165,215 |
| SAFE HARBOR CAC INC | $149,018 |
| CAC OF RUTHERFORD COUNTY INC | $147,477 |
| UPPER CUMBERLAND CAC | $135,949 |
| CAC OF HAMILTON COUNTY | $134,477 |
| MONTGOMERY COUNTY CAC | $131,068 |
| CAC OF THE 1ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT | $118,736 |
| KID'S PLACE - A CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER | $118,504 |
| THE CAC OF SULLIVAN COUNTY | $105,579 |
| CAC FOR THE 23RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT | $103,006 |
| 12TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT CAC | $99,849 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $3.8M) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 94% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
31 repeat relationships — 28 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- ECExchange Club - Carl Perkins Center for the Prevention of Child Abuse Inc6× · 2017–2025 · $1.3M · revenue +34%
MEMPHIS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER7× · 2017–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +52%- TVTHE VICTOR S JOHNSON III NASHVILLE CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE INC5× · 2017–2025 · $744k · revenue +101%
Funded once
- THTHE HOPE CENTER INC - CLEVELANone grant, 2021 · $13k
- THTHE HOPE CENTER - ATHENSone grant, 2021 · $13k
- COCAC OF RUTHERFORD COUNTY INCone grant, 2021 · $13k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Providing advocacy services for child abuse victims.
To provide a neutral, child-friendly agency community that facilitates a multidisciplinary approach to the prevention, detection, investigation, and treatment of child abuse.
To advocate for and provide services to children and families when there are allegations of abuse and neglect throughout the investigation,prosecution, treatment, and prevention of child abuse, and to reduce the trauma to childrent with…
Walker County Childrens Advocacy Center, Inc. will provide services to child victims of physical and sexual abuse, severely neglected children and children who have witnessed a violent crime. The Center will work every day to try and stop…
Child Advocacy Services
Interview facility for child abuse victims.
To provide children who have experienced sexual or physical abuse a coordinated community approach to investigation, prosecution, treatment, and advocacy that promotes their safety, healing, and well-being.
Provide advocacy services for abused children in Central Alabama.
To reduce trauma to children who have experienced abuse as well as their families by providing a safe and supportive environment through a collaboration of community agencies.
To operate a comprehensive child youth focused program based in a facility that allows law enforcement, child protection, mental health education professionals, prosecutors, medical and support services to work together to handle child…
Advocacy and care of physically and sexually abused children in lasalle county. we work with the court system in determining the best placement for children.
Coordinating agency for abused children
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children's Advocacy Center of Sullivan County and the most unlike its peers is Ashleys Place-Sumner Child Advocacy. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 26 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
27 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 27 of the 52 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds Exchange Club - Carl Perkins Center for the Prevention of Child Abuse Inc ↗
- Who funds MEMPHIS CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE VICTOR S JOHNSON III NASHVILLE CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDHELP INC ↗
- Who funds THE HEALTH OPPORTUNITY PROTECTION & ENCOURAGEMENT CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds UPPER CUMBERLAND CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF HAMILTON COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER OF RUTHERFORD COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT INC ↗
- Who funds SAFE HARBOR CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER OF SULLIVAN COUNTY ↗
- Who funds KIDS PLACE A CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds Child Advocacy Center ↗
- Who funds WILLIAMSON COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Child Advocacy Center of the 23rd Judicial District ↗
- Who funds FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER OF THE 9TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT INC ↗
- Who funds ASHLEYS PLACE-SUMNER CHILD ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds BLOUNT COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds COFFEE COUNTY CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds JUNIORS HOUSE INC ↗
- Who funds CAMPBELL COUNTY CHILDRENS CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER OF ANDERSON CO TN ↗
- Who funds ROBERTSON COUNTY CHILD ADVOCACY CEN ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S ADVOCACY CENTER 31ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDRENS CENTER OF THE CUMBERLAND ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: National Children's Alliance Inc · The Healing Trust Formerly Baptist Healing Hospital Trust · Elgin Children's Foundation Inc · East Tennessee Foundation · United Way of Middle Tennessee Inc · Hca Healthcare Foundation · The Community Foundation of Middle Tennessee Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Network for Good · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Tennessee Chapter of Children's Advocacy funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Tennessee Chapter of Children's Advocacy?
Find your warmest path to Tennessee Chapter of Children's Advocacy 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.