Skip to content
Umom New Day Centers Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Umom New Day Centers Inc

To end family homelessness by restoring hope and rebuilding lives, so no child will ever have to sleep on the streets.

$259k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$259k
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 2025.

Human Services$4.8MHousing & Shelter$1.2MEmployment$212kYouth Development$111kCrime & Legal$12k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$258,996
Median grant
1
States reached
$44M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SAVE THE FAMILY$258,996
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 (FY18–20, $71k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, 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%PHOENIX DREAM CENTER: $37k → 11%PHOENIX DREAM CENTER: $23k → 11%PHOENIX DREAM CENTER: $11k → 11%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.
$6.2M · 6 repeat orgs$123k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +151% since the first grant, against +51% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
2

Total granted

$6.2M
$123k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+151%
+51%

Still filing today

100%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Housing & ShelterHuman ServicesCrime & LegalOther
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

  • ST
    SAVE THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF ARIZONA
    9× · 2017–2025 · $4.8M · revenue +1%
  • HS
    Human Services Campus Inc
    3× · 2017–2019 · $1.1M · revenue ×19
  • SJ
    St Joseph the Worker
    3× · 2018–2020 · $212k · revenue +151%

Funded once

  • TC
    Tumbleweed Center for Youth Development
    one grant, 2017 · $111k
  • AL
    Arizona Legal Women and Youth Servicesgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $12k · revenue +51%
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
Az Hugs
Human Services
2
Arizona Latin-American Medical Association
Unclassified
3
Community Awareness Resource Entity of Arizona

The Community Awareness Resource Entity of Arizona (CareAz) is a community-based organization dedicated to reducing the harmful effects of substance use disorder through comprehensive prevention, treatment, recovery, and reentry support.…

Health
4
Umom New Day Centers Inc

To end family homelessness by restoring hope and rebuilding lives, so no child will ever have to sleep on the streets.

Housing & Shelter
5
City Help Inc of Phoenix

Our mission is to reach in and mine the incredible potential we believe lies within the lives of at-risk youth, the homeless, and needy families of our community by restoring hope and allowing them to dream again.

Human Services
6
Old Pueblo Community Services

Established in 1996, Old Pueblo Community Services has delivered housing and support services for people facing homelessness in Pima County. The organization serves various populations, including families, veterans, youth, individuals with…

Philanthropy
7
Youth and Family Alliance

Youth and family alliance (dba lifeworks) is a fearless advocate for youth and young adults pursuing a life they love and a stable future for themselves and their families. we strive to break cycles of instability by providing support and…

Human Services
8
Lighthouse Social Service Centers

Lighthouse social service centers is dedicated to enhancing lives and meeting the diverse needs of individuals, families and communities. through the utilization of comprehensive intergrated social service systems, lighthouse social…

Health
9
La Paloma Family Services Inc

We build relationships that enhance the development of skills, foster a sense of worth and enhance a belief in each child's individual potential.

—
10
House of Refuge Sunnyslope Inc

Our mission is to love, house, and equip men, women and children. coming from chronic unemployment, recovery, or an endless cycle of homelessness, our residents experience a clean, safe home where transforming their life can begin.…

Housing & Shelter
11
Goodwill Industries of Southern Az Inc

Goodwill Industries of Southern Arizona works toward ensuring that all people have the opportunity to reach their potential and contribute to our community. Through quality, evidence-based, workforce development programs; Goodwill…

—
12
Bethany House Services Inc

Bethany House Services empowers homeless and at-risk families with the solutions to achieve housing stability and long-term self-sufficiency.

Housing & Shelter
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tumbleweed Center for Youth Development; the most unlike its peers is St Joseph the Worker. 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

8 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SAVE THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF ARIZONA: $4,752,655 · Housing & ShelterSAVE THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF ARIZONAHuman Services Campus Inc: $1,064,654 · Housing & ShelterHuman Services Campus IncSt Joseph the Worker: $212,045 · OtherTumbleweed Center for Youth Development: $111,326 · OtherOur Family Services Inc: $100,000 · OtherCITY HELP FOUNDATION: $71,265 · Human ServicesARIZONA ANTI-TRAFFICKING NETWORK: $21,516 · Human ServicesArizona Legal Women and Youth Services: $12,098 · Crime & Legal
Housing & Shelter$5,817,309Other$423,371Human Services$92,781Crime & Legal$12,098

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSAVE THE FAMILY FOUNDATION OF ARIZONA: $4,752,655 over 9y, 15% of budgetHuman Services Campus Inc: $1,064,654 over 3y, 13% of budgetSt Joseph the Worker: $212,045 over 3y, 7.9% of budgetTumbleweed Center for Youth Development: $111,326 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetOur Family Services Inc: $100,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetCITY HELP FOUNDATION: $71,265 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetARIZONA ANTI-TRAFFICKING NETWORK: $21,516 over 2y, 3.2% of budgetArizona Legal Women and Youth Services: $12,098 over 1y, 2.0% 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.

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.

Arizona Community Fou…Garcia Family Foundat…Valley of the Sun Uni…Nina Mason Pulliam Ch…Virginia G Piper Char…American Endowment Fo…The Bank of America C…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Arizona Community FoundationAZ21.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Arizona Community Foundation · Garcia Family Foundation · Valley of the Sun United Way · Nina Mason Pulliam Charitable Trust · Virginia G Piper Charitable Trust · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Umom New Day Centers Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Umom New Day Centers Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 8 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 Umom New Day Centers’ 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