Loading…
Loading…
Iowa · Nonprofit
MAGICAL BEGINNINGS EARLY CHILDHOOD (Iowa) is funded by 2 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $6,500 in grants to it, the largest being ORCHARD PLACE ($6,000). 0 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
MAGICAL BEGINNINGS EARLY CHILDHOOD is better cushioned than half of the 20,275 human services nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 20,275 human services nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2024
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.
Government-grant reliance: 2024 30%. Grants only — government contracts and fees sit inside program revenue.
30% of MAGICAL BEGINNINGS EARLY CHILDHOOD’s revenue is contributions — more earned-revenue than three-quarters of its peers (87% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 4 of the last 8 reported years ran a deficit.
$500 from 1 funders in 2024, up from $6k and 1 in 2021.
From the IRS filings of MAGICAL BEGINNINGS EARLY CHILDHOOD’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
MAGICAL BEGINNINGS EARLY CHILDHOOD leans on a few funders — its largest provides 92% of grant income and the top three 100%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2021 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.
MAGICAL BEGINNINGS EARLY CHILDHOOD is locally rooted: 92% of its grant income comes from Iowa funders.
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.
100% of spending goes to programs.
100%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Operates in 1 state
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2017–2024), and the filings of 2funders 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