· Public charity
United Way of South Central Illinois
To solicit, collect, and otherwise raise money from the citizens of washington, marion, jefferson, franklin, hamilton, wayne, white, edwards, and wabash counties in southern illinois for charitable, philanthropic, and benevolent purposes.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 3 grants below total $23,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $215,313 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $192,313 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $13k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LIFEBOAT ALLIANCE | $10,000 |
| THE AMY CENTER | $7,000 |
| GREATER JEFFERSON COUNTY CHAM | $6,000 |
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 (FY19–23, $58k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +35% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.
10 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 7 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 FY2024, 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
- ASAMY SCHULZ CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC7× · 2017–2024 · $65k · revenue +72%
- COCASA OF JEFFERSON COUNTY7× · 2017–2023 · $60k · revenue +23%
- LALIFEBOAT ALLIANCE LTD6× · 2017–2024 · $60k · revenue +35%
Funded once
- FUFIRST UNITED METHODIST CHURCH OF MT VERNONone grant, 2020 · $37k
- CCCROSSWALK COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +77%
- SHSSM HEALTH CARE CORPORATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue +35%
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.
The program provides organization structure, leadership and training for community volunteers who serve as court appointed special advocates(casa) for agbused and neglected children in south central missouri.
To advocate for abused and neglected children in the legal welfare system.
Recruit, train and support community volunteers who assist the court in protecting the best interests of abused and neglected children in southwest missouri.
Present the interests of abused and negleced children in court proceedings in franklin county, mo, gasconade county, mo, and osage county, mo by providing advocacy with volunteers.
The national casa/gal association, together with state and local member programs, supports and promotes court-appointed volunteer advocacy so every child who has experienced abuse or neglect can be safe, have a permanent home, and the…
Advocacy for abused and neglected children
Court appointed special advocates for children
Advocate for abused and neglected children. recruiting, training, and monitoring of volunteers who advocate for the best interest of abused and neglected children referred by the courts.
CASA of Cook County's vision is to protect abused and neglected children by providing them in court, a safe and permanent home, and an opportunity to grow, learn and thrive.
Provide court appointed advocates for children
Provides a voice for abused and neglected children who are under the legal protection of the court system
To combat child sexual and physical abuse by providing services to children and families in a safe enviroment.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jefferson County Comprehensive Services Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Centralia Humane Society. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
15 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. 15 of the 21 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 AMY SCHULZ CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CASA OF JEFFERSON COUNTY ↗
- Who funds LIFEBOAT ALLIANCE LTD ↗
- Who funds THE CENTRALIA HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds One Hope United - Hudelson Region ↗
- Who funds CASA OF FRANKLIN & HAMILTON COUNTIES ↗
- Who funds CROSSWALK COMMUNITY ACTION AGENCY INC ↗
- Who funds SEXUAL ASSAULT & FAMILY EMERGENCIES CENTER ↗
- Who funds The YMCA of Jefferson County ↗
- Who funds SSM HEALTH CARE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds CASA of South Central Illinois ↗
- Who funds GATEWAY REGION YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds WABASH AREA DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER JEFFERSON COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ↗
- Who funds JEFFERSON COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES INC ↗
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: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 United Way of South Central Illinois 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.