· Public charity
Young at Heart Resources
The mission of Young at Heart Resources is to promote systems that maintain and enhance the qualify of life for older adults in the home environment of their choice.
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.
The 26 grants below total $3,051,043 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $3,333,437 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $282,394 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 · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $6k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $54k
- $50k–250k21 grants · $2.5M
- $250k+1 grant · $443k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Interfaith Community Services Inc | $443,478 |
| Concerned Citizens for the Community | $247,346 |
| Linn County Council on Aging | $226,774 |
| Grundy County Council on Aging | $185,021 |
| DeKalb County Senior Citizens Council Inc | $178,763 |
| Putnam County Senior Citizens | $149,566 |
| Andrew County Council on Aging Inc | $134,223 |
| Harrison County Council on Aging | $131,241 |
| Daviess County Multipurpose Senior Center Inc | $128,075 |
| Gentry County Senior Center Inc | $114,964 |
| Marceline Area Nutrition Program | $114,134 |
| Clinton County Senior Action Council & OATS Committee | $111,105 |
| Mercer County Council on Aging | $108,272 |
| Atchison Council Multipurpose Senior Center Inc | $91,127 |
| Prescription In-Home Services | $90,891 |
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, $10.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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.
32 repeat relationships — 26 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
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
- CCCONCERNED CITIZENS FOR THE COMMUNIT9× · 2017–2025 · $2.0M · revenue +63% · 48% of their budget
- LCLINN COUNTY COUNCIL OF AGING INC9× · 2017–2025 · $1.7M · revenue +25% · 71% of their budget
- DCDEKALB CO SENIOR CITZENS COUNCIL INC9× · 2017–2025 · $1.4M · revenue +31% · 71% of their budget
Funded once
- AADTone grant, 2018 · $25k
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.
To offer a nutrition program for older persons.
Community senior centerprovide meals to senior citizens & homebound citizens
Provides senior center and congregate and home delivered meals, homemaker services allowing seniors to remain in their homes.
To provide congregate meals, home delivered meals, transportation, and information and assistance to senior citizens of washington county, illinois.
Provide affordable and free meals to senior citizens
Providing meals to the senior citizens at the meal site and with home deliveries.
Provide services to local seniors to improve their quality of life and assist them in remaining in their homes
Serve elderly nutritious meals
The mission of the lancaster county council on aging is to provide a system of coordinated and comprehensive services to enable older persons of lancaster county to continue to maintain their independence.
Provide Meals & Other Services for the Elderly
Senior citizen programs through the area agency on aging which provides a center, services, congregate meals and home delivery meals.
Provide meals & services to senior citizens
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dekalb Co Senior Citzens Council Inc and the most unlike its peers is Legal Aid of Western Missouri. 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 46 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% 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.
25 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. 25 of the 33 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 INTERFAITH COMMUNITY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds CONCERNED CITIZENS FOR THE COMMUNIT ↗
- Who funds LINN COUNTY COUNCIL OF AGING INC ↗
- Who funds DEKALB CO SENIOR CITZENS COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds GRUNDY COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC ↗
- Who funds PUTNAM CO SENIOR CITIZENS ORG INC ↗
- Who funds HARRISON COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING ↗
- Who funds ANDREW COUNTY COUNCIL ON AGING INC ↗
- Who funds GENTRY COUNTY SENIOR CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds MARCELINE AREA NUTRITION PROGRAM INC ↗
- Who funds DAVIESS CO MULTI-PURPOSE SR CTR ↗
- Who funds SERVE LINK HOME CARE INC ↗
- Who funds SULLIVAN CO MULTI-PURPOSE SENIOR CENTER ↗
- Who funds CALDWELL COUNTY NUTRITION CENTER ↗
- Who funds ATCHISON COUNTY MULTI PURPOSE CTR ↗
- Who funds TRI-CITY SENIOR COUNCIL OF HOLT COUNTY NUTRITION SITE 11A ↗
- Who funds CLINTON CO SENIOR ACTION COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds Mercer County Council on Aging Inc ↗
- Who funds SENIOR CITIZENS OF HOLT COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds PATTONSBURG MULTI-PURPOSE CENTER ↗
- Who funds ROCK PORT SENIOR CENTER ASSOCIATES ↗
- Who funds Legal Aid of Western Missouri ↗
- Who funds Nodaway County Senior Citizens Senate Inc ↗
- Who funds CAMERON NUTRITION CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds ACCESS II - INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER ↗
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: Mfa Oil Foundation · Meals on Wheels America · Gary G Taylor Charitable Tr · 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 Young at Heart Resources 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 Young at Heart Resources?
Find your warmest path to Young at Heart Resources 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.