California · Nonprofit
CHOICE IN AGING
CHOICE IN AGING (California) receives grants from 35 organizations whose IRS filings report $2,081,407 to it, the largest being NETWORK FOR GOOD ($234,654). 25 of them have funded it in more than one year.
- Revenue FY2025
- $13M
- Funders on record
- 35
- Grants received
- $2.1M
- Net assets
- $20M
What Choice in Aging does
Mission
To promote the dignity and independence of people with disabilities and special needs.
As stated on its FY2025 Form 990.
Programs
Adult day health care (adhc), which served 121 clients within the year, was developed in california in the 1970s and has spread across the nation as a valuable program that can help those with the most serious health conditions thrive while living in their own homes instead of being forced to move to a skilled nursing facility. Adhc programs include individualized therapeutic, social, and health services provided by a multidisciplinary team of nurses, social workers, therapists, activity coordinators, and other professionals who are experts in geriatric care.these services help frail or vulnerable older adults and people with disabilities maintain their health and social contacts, access nursing, occupational, and speech therapy, get exercise, prevent falls, and slow the deterioration of cognitive functioning by providing a sense of joy and belonging. As their loved ones are being safely cared for at the center for part of the day, caregivers are also provided with essential respiteour mt. Diablo center in pleasant hill offers specialized multicultural programming for russian and farsi/dari speakers. We also offer programming for those with mid-to-late stage alzheimer's disease in…
$3,212,524 spent$1,503,393 earned by the program42% of program spendingThe multipurpose senior services program (mssp), which served 383 clients within the year, is a medi-cal program that provides intensive care management and services to people 60+ who meet the criteria to be placed in a skilled nursing facility but would prefer to remain in their own homes. The program helps prevent or delay nursing home placement by providing a complete assessment of the client's physical, mental, and social well-being. The mssp nurse and social worker partner with the participants, their doctors, and caregivers to create personalized care plans that support living safely at home.services provided through mssp may include minor home modification, supplemental personal and chore care, respite, transportation, counseling, therapy, meals, translation support, and other services.the state of california budgeted $1,071,200 for 200 mssp participants, which equals approximately $5,356 per participant per year for the mssp program. In comparison, nursing facility costs are approximately $130,000 per person per year.based upon individual needs, mssp arranges for services available in the community. If eligible, the program may purchase items and services not covered by…
$2,709,582 spent$953,868 earned by the program35% of program spendingOne-third of covid-19 deaths in california have been among nursing home residents, and we know that seniors and people with disabilities are safer living at home. The california community transitions (cct) project , which served 82 clients within the year, helps medi-cal eligible californians who live in skilled nursing facilities move into their own homes or other community settings with appropriate supports to help them live safely.as california's version of the national money follows the person (mfp) program, the cct project helps individuals living in skilled nursing facilities return to their homes or communities, with personalized support from a transition coordinator. The coordinator helps with exploring living choices and explaining the services the program offers, such as home and vehicle adaptation, assistive devices, transportation options, wheelchairs and other medical equipment, self-care training, and getting a personal care attendant. The program also provides assistance coordinating with physicians, family, the nursing facility, landlords and others.once the client has moved, the transition coordinator follows the participant for a year, helping with issues that…
$1,769,791 spent$477,731 earned by the program23% of program spending
The 3 programs described on its FY2024 Form 990, listed largest first by expense. Program spending in total: $7,691,897.
The organization over time
Each line starts at 100 in 2018, so what you read is the shape rather than the size: 150 means half as much again as 2018, 50 means half. The number beside each label in the key is where it ended. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
Balance sheet
Total assets and total liabilities at each year end, in dollars. The largest one-year move in total assets was 2022 to 2023, from $6.9M to $16M (+133%).
How it's funded, over time
Each bar is one year's revenue split into where it came from, and every bar is the same height — these are shares, not amounts, so a year that raised twice as much looks the same size. Hover a bar for the split.
Government-grant reliance: 2019 40% · 2020 48% · 2022 19% · 2023 79% · 2024 57% · 2025 45%. Grants only. Government contracts and fees sit inside program revenue.
70% of CHOICE IN AGING’s revenue is contributions — more reliant on donations than three-quarters of its peers (7% for the typical peer).
Surplus & reserves
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 0 of the last 8 reported years ran a deficit.
reserve
Leadership and staff
The officers, directors, trustees and key employees listed on each return. Joined and no longer listed compare each filing with the year before, matching people by surname and first initial; a year after a gap, or a roster under three people, has no comparison.
Chief executive
Debbie Toth
Members/ CEO & president
Board chair
Victor Baker
Chair
As listed on its FY2025 Form 990.
Who funds it, year by year
2017 → 2023: the base broadened from 3 funders to 17 funders, grant income rose $98k → $364k.
11 of 35 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 42% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.
From the IRS filings of CHOICE IN AGING’s funders (the co-funder graph). Top 30 of 35 funders by total. Association, not causation. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.
How concentrated its funding is
CHOICE IN AGING has a broad base — no single funder exceeds 11% of grant income, and it takes 6 funders to reach half.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 6 funders to its left
74% of the income these shares are computed over arrives through pass-through sponsors or from payers whose filings do not say what kind of payment it is. Concentration is still measured over all of it, because the money is real; what it does not support is a claim about how many institutions have chosen to fund CHOICE IN AGING.
Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 82% · 2018 48% · 2019 30% · 2020 21% · 2021 32% · 2022 16% · 2023 22% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.
How long its funders stay
41% of CHOICE IN AGING's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 71% give in more than one year at all.
Share of funders still giving k years after their first recorded grant, pooled across every acquisition cohort. A funder counts as retained in a year only if it made a grant that year. Measured to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving — a funder cannot be counted as lapsed in a year most filers have not reached.
Where its funders are
67% of CHOICE IN AGING's grant income comes from California funders.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Funder states come from each funder’s own filing. $883k arriving through sponsors registered in 9 states is excluded from the map and the split above: a sponsor holds money on a donor’s behalf, so its registered address would place those dollars somewhere no donor need ever have been. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.
Against its field
CHOICE IN AGING runs a healthier operating margin than three-quarters of the 2,969 health nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 2,969 health nonprofits $10M–$100M, FY2025
Government funding CHOICE IN AGING receives
Grants and contracts to this organization from federal (USASpending) and state checkbooks, reconciled to its EIN. $500k on record.
- Department of Health and Human Services$500k
Federal grants vs contracts are distinguished; state line items keep their reported category. Matched by name + geography (the BMF), so coverage is partial and precision-first.
Organizations like CHOICE IN AGING
Organizations whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over every organization in the US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
In California
Nationally
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
Where the money goes
80% of spending goes to programs.
Governance
Public support
98%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Footprint & structure
Files a return copy in 1 state
Screen this organization
A dated, signed PDF of the compliance screen for CHOICE IN AGING: IRS status (Business Master File, Publication 78, auto-revocation), the OFAC sanctions lists, the Internal Revenue Bulletin, and California registration, with the Rev. Proc. 2018-32 §8.01 reliance elements stated element by element. Generated from the current files at the moment you download it.
Screens are triage, not determinations; a source that cannot be read reports not screened, never clear. Screen this nonprofit · How the screen works · on the API as GET /api/screening/{ein}?format=pdf
Questions and answers
- Who funds CHOICE IN AGING?
- CHOICE IN AGING (California) receives grants from 35 organizations whose IRS filings report $2,081,407 to it, the largest being NETWORK FOR GOOD ($234,654). 25 of them have funded it in more than one year.
- How many funders does CHOICE IN AGING have?
- IRS filings report 35 organizations giving $2,081,407 in grants to CHOICE IN AGING, 25 of which have funded it in more than one year.
- Who is the largest funder of CHOICE IN AGING?
- NETWORK FOR GOOD is the largest funder on record, with $234,654 in grants. The full list of funders is on this page.
- How can an organization like CHOICE IN AGING find more funders?
- Start with the funders already giving here, then look at the foundations that back similar organizations in California. The funding by cause and by state pages list the largest funders for a given area and how to approach them.
Play a game about who funds Choice in Aging →
These figures are read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML: this organization’s own return for FY2025 (financials across 2018–2025), and the filings of 35 funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. Trends on this page end at FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving; later years are shown and marked, and move no figure. Data on this page was exported October 22, 2026. What this page cannot tell you · view filing