Loading…
Loading…
New Jersey · Nonprofit
FAN4KIDS (New Jersey) is funded by 8 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $201,441 in grants to it, the largest being Youth Improving Non-profits for Children ($70,000). 5 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
FAN4KIDS's funding has concentrated — grant income rose while the number of funders held roughly flat.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 21,488 education nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2023
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
38% of FAN4KIDS’s revenue is contributions — about as donation-reliant as the typical peer (55% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 2 of the last 5 reported years ran a deficit.
Grant income rose $0 → $9k on a roughly flat funder count — a concentrated base.
5 of 8 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 59% 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 FAN4KIDS’s funders (the co-funder graph). Top 7 of 8 funders by total. Association, not causation.
FAN4KIDS leans on a few funders — its largest provides 35% of grant income and the top three 80%; half comes from just 2 funders.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 2 funders to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2018 100% · 2019 38% · 2020 34% · 2021 54% · 2022 44% · 2023 100% · 2024 100% — broadly stable.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
FAN4KIDS draws 100% of its grant income from funders outside New Jersey — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 6 states in all.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
86% of spending goes to programs.
100%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Operates in 2 states
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2023 (financials across 2018–2023), and the filings of 8funders 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. view filing