Skip to content
Burbank Housing Development Corporation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Burbank Housing Development Corporation

Burbank housing development corp is a local nonprofit housing developer dedicated to building quality affordable housing in the north bay of california.

$18k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$8k
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.

Housing & Shelter$2.3M
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $7,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $18,255 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $10,755 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$7,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$238M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HOUSING CALIFORNIA INC$7,500
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 (FY20–24, $171k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%HOUSING CALIFORNIA: $12k → 12%HOUSING CALIFORNIA INC: $8k → 12%HOUSING CALIFORNIA INC: $6k → 12%TIDES CENTER: $105k → 10%TIDES CENTER: $40k → 10%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
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
Burbank Housingsr Corporation

To own and operate affordable rental housing.

—
2
Mutual Housing California Formerly Known As Sacramento Mutual Housing Association

The mission of mutual housing california is to develop, manage, and support sustainable affordable housing where residents are partners in advancing equitable communities.

Housing & Shelter
3
California Housing Partner Corporation

The California Housing Partnership Corporation creates and preserves affordable and sustainable homes for Californians with low incomes by providing expert financial and policy solutions to nonprofit and public partners.

Unclassified
4
Pacific Housing Association
—
5
Mutual Housing Management

To be an exceptional steward of the portfolio of multifamily housing owned by mutual housing california and other 501(c)(3) entities (or limited partnerships in which a 501(c)(3) entity is a general partner) to support long-term…

Housing & Shelter
6
Homes for California Dba Homes for Sonoma

Homes for Sonoma is a nonprofit developer creating quality workforce housing options that support safe and sustainable community, and finds efficient, scalable solutions to address the housing crisis in Sonoma County and throughout…

Housing & Shelter
7
Sacramento Neighborhood Housing Services Inc

To improve and restore district-wide neighborhoods for the benefit of the residents.

Housing & Shelter
8
Homeownership San Francisco dba Home Sf

The Organization is a citywide collaborative of housing counseling agencies that helps diverse and underserved households achieve and sustain homeownership in San Francisco.

—
9
Habitat for Humanity of California Inc

habitat for humanity california is a coalition of habitat for humanity affiliates working across the state providing, permanent, affordable homeownership housing for working families, by building and preserving homes. habitat for…

—
10
Housing Trust Silicon Valley

Our mission at housing trust silicon valley, is to use transformative housing finance and public and private partnerships to create more equitable and affordable communities.

Housing & Shelter
11
San Francisco Housing Action Coalition

Promote public understanding of policies supporting the creation of well-designed, well-located housing at all levels of affordability for residents of the Bay Area, California.

Housing & Shelter
12
Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco Inc

The Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco is dedicated to combating the displacement crisis gripping our city by building the power of working-class tenants of color to take on the real estate industry and win housing justice for all.…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Burbank Housing Development Corporation; the most unlike its peers is Red Housing Fund. 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 10 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BURBANK HOUSING COMMUNITIES CORPORATION: $1,700,000 · OtherBURBANK HOUSING COMMUNITIES CORPORATIONSTONY POINT APARTMENTS INC: $118,622 · OtherSTONY POINT APARTMENTS INC+1 more: $59,064 · OtherBURBANK HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $232,894 · Housing & ShelterBURBANK HOUSIN…NON-PROFIT HOUSING ASSOCIATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA: $51,501 · Housing & ShelterNON-PROFIT HOU…+1 more: $6,000 · Housing & ShelterTIDES CENTER: $145,000 · Human ServicesHOUSING CALIFORNIA INC: $25,500 · Human ServicesRED HOUSING FUND: $5,000 · Public BenefitENTERPRISE COMMUNITY PARTNERS INC: $5,000 · Community Improvement
Other$1,877,686Housing & Shelter$290,395Human Services$170,500Public Benefit$5,000Community Improvement$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBURBANK HOUSING COMMUNITIES CORPORATION: $1,700,000 over 1y, 52% of budgetBURBANK HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $232,894 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $145,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBURBANK HOUSING MANAGEMENT CORPORATION: $59,064 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetNON-PROFIT HOUSING ASSOCIATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA: $51,501 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetHOUSING CALIFORNIA INC: $25,500 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetCalifornia Coalition for Rural Housing Project: $6,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetENTERPRISE COMMUNITY PARTNERS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 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.

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.

The San Francisco Fou…Silicon Valley Commun…
The San Francisco FoundationCA14.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The San Francisco Foundation · Silicon Valley Community 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 Burbank Housing Development Corporation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Burbank Housing Development Corporation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Enterprise Community Partners Inc: 22% of 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 · 0–25%
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 10 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.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Burbank Housing Development’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