Skip to content

· Private foundation

Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks of the USA Charity Fund Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$46k
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$18k
Largest
01What it funds
0187% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$120kYouth Development$46kHousing & Shelter$13kFood & Nutrition$11kAnimals$9kEducation$6kPublic Benefit$4kRecreation & Sports$4kOther$0
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k11 grants · $17k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $29k
$1,067
Median grant
1
States reached
$740k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ELKS NEEDY FAMILY CHRISTMAS PROGRAM$18,421
ELKS YOUTH ACTIVITIES$10,538
NOURISH LA$4,000
LOCAL HOMELESS PROJECT$4,000
SANTA MONICA ARTS FOUNDATION$2,000
DRUG AWARENESS ESSAY CONTEST$1,700
ELKS FAMILY ASSISTANCE$1,067
Individual grant recipient$1,000
GOWING HOPE GARDENS$1,000
ST JOSEPHS CENTER$1,000
SALVATION ARMY$500
Individual grant recipient$480
GIRL SCOUTS TROOP 1445$200
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–24, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%ST JOSEPH CENTER: $2k → 14%ST JOSEPHS CENTER: $1k → 14%ST JOSEPHS CENTER: $1k → 14%ST JOSEPHS CENTER: $1k → 14%ST JOSEPH CENTER: $500 → 14%ST JOSEPH CENTER: $500 → 14%ST JOSEPH CENTER: $500 → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$198k · 18 repeat orgs$49k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +76% since the first grant, against -37% for those funded once.

18 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
11

Total granted

$198k
$38k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+76%
-37%

Still filing today

39%
9%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Youth DevelopmentHuman ServicesHealthCrime & LegalEducationFood & NutritionOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • BA
    BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SANTA MONICA INC
    3× · 2017–2019 · $11k · revenue +46%
  • WF
    WESTSIDE FOOD BANK
    2× · 2020–2021 · $6k · revenue +127%
  • SJ
    ST JOSEPH CENTER
    7× · 2017–2024 · $6k · revenue +276%

Funded once

  • TD
    THE DICTIONARY PROJECT
    one grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue -37%
  • ED
    ELKS DICTIONARY PROJECT
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • SM
    SANTA MONICA POLICA ACTIVITIES LEAGUE
    one grant, 2022 · $4k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Santa Monica Girls Fastpitch

Girls youth softball - ages 4 to 14 clinics, practices & games - spring, summer & fall

Recreation & Sports
2
Los Angeles Retired Fire and Police Benevolent Association
Crime & Legal
3
San Mateo County Sheriffs Activities League

The mission of the sheriff's activities league is to invest in all youth of san mateo county by creating opportunities that guide them toward their full potential through impactful programs, which foster relationships between deputies,…

Youth Development
4
All About Kids La
Philanthropy
5
Santa Monica Science Magnet

The santa monica science magnet program is a two year program designed for students who demonstrate interest in the sciences. this program offers extra curricular activities to 7th and 8th graders. the association's activities are designed…

Education
6
South Central Prevention Coalition

Community based organization.

Community Improvement
7
Hollywood Police Activities League

Hollywood pal drives positive change in the community we serve by partnering with lapd and school-aged youth in programs that celebrate diversity, equity, and inclusion and inspire personal excellence, social awareness, and civic…

Crime & Legal
8
Santa Barbara Police Activities League Inc

The santa barbara police activities league (sbpal) builds bridges between youth, law enforcement, and the community through mentorship, leadership, and academic enrichment. we maintain an open-door policy for all youth ages 11-18, with a…

Community Improvement
9
Santa Monica Historical Society

Historical nbsp;preservation nbsp;and nbsp;education

Arts & Culture
10
Western Avenue Community Action Inc

Provide resources, education and services to the underserved African-American youth population in Los Angeles.

Community Improvement
11
Santa Monica Young Men's Christian Association

Please see schedule o.

Human Services
12
Topanga Police Youth Board Inc

The Topanga Police Youth Board exists to support the development and growth of the community youth by supporting the Police Activity League (PALs) program which is a gang diversion and leadership program.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Boys and Girls Club of Santa Monica Inc; the most unlike its peers is Los Angeles County Police Canine Assoc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

9 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 36 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ELKS NEEDY FAMILY CHRISTMAS PROGRAM: $80,421 · OtherELKS NEEDY FAMILY CHRISTMAS PROGRAMELKS YOUTH ACTIVITIES: $29,958 · OtherELKS YOUTH ACTIVITIESLOCAL HOMELESS PROJECT: $12,980 · OtherLOCAL HOMELESS PROJECTTHE SALVATION ARMY: $11,406 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMYELKS VETERANS SERVICE COMMITTEE: $10,500 · OtherGRANT TO NEEDY FAMILY FOR BURIAL: $8,259 · Other+23 more: $51,148 · Other+23 moreTHE DICTIONARY PROJECT: $15,020 · EducationBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SANTA MONICA INC: $11,000 · Youth DevelopmentWESTSIDE FOOD BANK: $6,000 · Food & NutritionST JOSEPH CENTER: $6,000 · Human ServicesSANTA MONICA ARTS FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 · Arts & CultureCLAREMATRIX: $1,700 · HealthLos Angeles County Police Canine Assoc: $1,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$204,672Education$15,020Youth Development$11,000Food & Nutrition$6,000Human Services$6,000Arts & Culture$2,000Health$1,700Crime & Legal$1,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE DICTIONARY PROJECT: $15,020 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SANTA MONICA INC: $11,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWESTSIDE FOOD BANK: $6,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetST JOSEPH CENTER: $6,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetSANTA MONICA POLICE ACTIVITIES LEAGUE: $3,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetSt Anne School: $2,200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSANTA MONICA ARTS FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetCLAREMATRIX: $1,700 over 2y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds THE DICTIONARY PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SANTA MONICA INC ↗
  • Who funds WESTSIDE FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds ST JOSEPH CENTER ↗
  • Who funds SANTA MONICA POLICE ACTIVITIES LEAGUE ↗
  • Who funds St Anne School ↗
  • Who funds SANTA MONICA ARTS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CLAREMATRIX ↗
  • Who funds Los Angeles County Police Canine Assoc ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

California Community FoundationCA12.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks of the USA Charity Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks of the USA Charity Fund Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 36 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Benevolent & Protective Order of Elks of the USA Charity’s filings →

    More from the funding graph