Skip to content
Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation A at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation A

BROOKLYN LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION A (dba.

$620k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$620k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Crime & Legal$2.3MCommunity Improvement$1.7MHousing & Shelter$691kHuman Services$66kEducation$10k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$620,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$8.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
RHA KIM GROSSMAN & MCLLWAIN LLP$620,000
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 (FY17–20, $212k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 16%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 16%St Nicks Alliance Home Care: $56k → 20%African Communities Together: $13k → 17%Churches United for Fair Hous: $116k → 20%African Communities Together: $8k → 17%Business Center for New Amer: $10k → 17%Asian American Federation: $10k → 17%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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.5M · 7 repeat orgs$222k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
7

Total granted

$4.5M
$222k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+220%

Still filing today

86%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementCrime & LegalEducationHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • UJ
    URBAN JUSTICE CENTER
    2× · 2017–2018 · $215k · revenue +29%
  • SU
    SOUTHSIDE UNITED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND CORPORATION
    2× · 2018–2020 · $101k · revenue +133%
  • CS
    Cooper Square Community Development Committee Inc
    3× · 2017–2020 · $30k · revenue +46%

Funded once

  • CU
    CHURCHES UNITED FOR FAIR HOUSING INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $116k · revenue +710%
  • SN
    ST NICKS ALLIANCE HOME CARE CORPORATION
    one grant, 2018 · $56k · revenue +6%
  • YA
    YEMENI AMERICAN MERCHANT ASSOCIATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +103%
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
Central Brooklyn Economic Development Corp

Develop and provide affordable housing

Education
2
Cnyc Inc (Council of New York Cooperatives & Condominiums)

Support housing cooperatives and condominiums

—
3
Abyssinian Development Corporation

A comprehensive community development corporation focused on providing affordable housing to low and moderate income families and social services, principally educational programs in the areas of college/career readiness, stem, and…

—
4
Community Capital New York Inc

Community capital is a nonprofit lender that has revitalized communities and transformed lives in the mid-hudson valley, bronx and fairfield county, ct for 36 years. our mission is to foster economic opportunity for underserved individuals…

Housing & Shelter
5
Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corp

To manage the brooklyn navy yard for the city of new york, specifically to expand job opportunities for new yorkers by fostering the development of small businesses.

Community Improvement
6
Northeast Brooklyn Housing Develop

The Organization is commited to the preservation, development, and management of affordable housing and home ownership opportunities:community and economic development initiative and human services to effect social change in central…

Housing & Shelter
7
South Bronx Community Management Co Inc

The company is involved in acquiring and managing residential dwelling units primarily in the south bronx, for low income families.

Housing & Shelter
8
Housing Partnership Development Corporation

Housing partnership development corporation functions to provide available low and moderate cost housing in the new york metro area through new housing production, preservation, rehabilitation, as well as the revitalization and…

Housing & Shelter
9
Co-Counsel Nyc Inc

To transform our collective capacity to navigate complex legal systems and support safe, thriving, and engaged immigrant communities.

Crime & Legal
10
Uniondale Community Land Trust Inc

The Uniondale Community Land Trust, Inc. is a not-for-profit organization whose mission includes community renewal, revitalization, integration, and empowerment. Utilizing cooperative models of leadership and ownership, the Uniondale CLT,…

Community Improvement
11
Committee Against Anti-Asian Violence Inc

CAAAV was founded in 1986 as one of the first groups in the United States to respond to racially motivated violence against Asians. Since then, CAAAV has broaden its focus to address a wide array of needs and challenges facing the Asian…

Civil Rights
12
Caaav Voice Inc

CAAAV Voice is a grassroot organization aiming to empower Asian immigrant communities by organizing against gentrification, tenant rights and promote social justice.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwest Bronx Community and Clergy Coalition Inc; the most unlike its peers is Yemeni American Merchant Association Inc. 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

13 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. 13 of the 14 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
11/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VOLUNTEERS OF LEGAL SERVICE INC: $2,083,839 · Crime & LegalVOLUNTEERS OF LEGAL SERVICE INCRHA KIM GROSSMAN & MCLLWAIN LLP: $1,570,000 · OtherRHA KIM GROSSMAN & MCLLWAIN LLPURBAN JUSTICE CENTER: $214,635 · OtherURBAN JUSTICE CENTERCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INC: $512,591 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY DEV…Cooper Square Community Development Committee Inc: $30,000 · Community Improvement+2 more: $20,000 · Community ImprovementCHURCHES UNITED FOR FAIR HOUSING INC: $115,816 · Human ServicesST NICKS ALLIANCE HOME CARE CORPORATION: $56,447 · Human ServicesAFRICAN COMMUNITIES TOGETHER INC: $20,000 · Human ServicesASIAN AMERICAN FEDERATION INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesACCOMPANY CAPITAL INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesSOUTHSIDE UNITED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND CORPORATION: $101,386 · Housing & ShelterYEMENI AMERICAN MERCHANT ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 · Education
Crime & Legal$2,083,839Other$1,784,635Community Improvement$562,591Human Services$212,263Housing & Shelter$101,386Education$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetVOLUNTEERS OF LEGAL SERVICE INC: $2,083,839 over 6y, 26% of budgetCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INC: $512,591 over 3y, 33% of budgetURBAN JUSTICE CENTER: $214,635 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCHURCHES UNITED FOR FAIR HOUSING INC: $115,816 over 1y, 14% of budgetSOUTHSIDE UNITED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND CORPORATION: $101,386 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetCooper Square Community Development Committee Inc: $30,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetAFRICAN COMMUNITIES TOGETHER INC: $20,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetYEMENI AMERICAN MERCHANT ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetCYPRESS HILLS LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetASIAN AMERICAN FEDERATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetNorthwest Bronx Community and Clergy Coalition Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

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.

Brooklyn Community Fo…Association for Neigh…Make the Road New YorkNew York FoundationRobin Hood FoundationNorth Star Fund IncNew York Women's Foun…United Way of New Yor…The Ford FoundationThe Goldman Sachs Cha…National Philanthropi…Fidelity Investments …
Brooklyn Community FoundationNY19.7× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Brooklyn Community Foundation · Association for Neighborhood & Housing Development · Make the Road New York · New York Foundation · Robin Hood Foundation · North Star Fund Inc · New York Women's Foundation Inc · United Way of New York City · The Ford Foundation · The Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation A funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation A. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 14 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2024, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation A’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home