· Public charity
Capital Impact Partners
Through capital and commitment, CAPITAL IMPACT PARTNERS helps build (please go to schedule o) inclusive and equitable communities by providing people access to the capital and opportunities they deserve.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $17k
- $10k–50k33 grants · $672k
- $50k–250k47 grants · $4.8M
- $250k+4 grants · $1.7M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CDC SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE CORP | $605,000 |
| 1825 KENDALL STREET | $500,000 |
| MOORE PLACE LLC | $285,000 |
| 1232 SHIFT CUBED PARTNERS | $285,000 |
| CITY FIRST ENTERPRISES INC | $233,771 |
| GOOD PLACES LLC | $155,000 |
| EATSPLACE | $149,337 |
| DALLAS CITY HOMES | $138,889 |
| SANDIDGE URBAN GROUP | $138,889 |
| COMMUNITY LEAGUE OF THE HEIGHTS | $138,889 |
| SMJ DEVELOPMENT LLC | $138,889 |
| MCI PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LLC | $138,889 |
| CLIFFORD BEERS HOUSING INC | $138,889 |
| WILSON DRAKE DEVELOPMENT | $138,889 |
| WOMEN'S HOME PRESERVATION | $138,889 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $2.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 99% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +102% since the first grant, against +60% for the ones you funded once.
63 repeat relationships — 43 still active in FY2024, 20 since wound down; 42 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.0M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- LILOW INCOME INVESTMENT FUND2× · 2022–2023 · $4.2M · revenue +102%
THE REINVESTMENT FUND INC2× · 2022–2023 · $4.2M · revenue +4%- WAWASHINGTON AREA COMMUNITY INVESTMENT FUND INC6× · 2019–2024 · $2.1M · revenue +6% · 26% of their budget
Funded once
- E1EUCLID 1722 LLCone grant, 2023 · $600k
- ALA-PEACE LLCone grant, 2023 · $450k
- UOURBAN OASIS DEVELOPMENT LLCone grant, 2022 · $400k
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To promote, strengthen, and advocate for the community development sector throughout Marylands urban, suburban, and rural communities.
To support equitable access to economic opportunities for immigrants, refugees, low-income, marginalized, and underserved communities in king county and the united states.
Npcdc's mission is to initate, sponsor and operate housing and economic development projects that create economic stability and upward mobility for low-income families in metropolitan washington, dc.
Grow businesses, build wealth and increase reinvestement in the african communities of minnesota
The organization was founded by a group of concerned citizens, working in cooperation with the detroit city council, to shape food policy and to work for a more localized, more just, and environmentally friendly food system. the…
CDC focuses on stabilization, housing and job readiness in order to strengthen both the family and the clients we support. CDC provides housing support, fiscal literacy and job readiness help focusing on credit repair, stabilization and…
VCDC delivers vital financial resources and support while collaborating with local organizations dedicated to social impact, ensuring the creation of affordable homes in vibrant neighborhoods where everyone can thrive.
Community development financial institution that links socially concerned investors with community needs by making affordable housing, community and economic development loans to nonprofit orgs, small businesses and low/moderate income…
Mid-city community advocacy network works to build a safe, productive, and healthy community for the residents of city heights and greater san diego through collaboration, advocacy, and organizing.
Cdcli invests in the housing and economic aspirations of individuals and families by providing solutions that foster and maintain vibrant, equitable, and sustainable communities.
A certified community development financial institution organized to increase access to capital for affordable housing and community facilities.
Centering those who have been historically oppressed, housing development center, inc. collaborates with its partners to envision, develop, and sustain affordable homes and community places.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Beloved Community Incubator Inc and the most unlike its peers is Louisiana Perinatal Justice Allianc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 25 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
76 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 76 of the 226 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds CDC SMALL BUSINESS FINANCE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds LOW INCOME INVESTMENT FUND ↗
- Who funds THE REINVESTMENT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON AREA COMMUNITY INVESTMENT FUND INC ↗
- Who funds LATINO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds CITY FIRST ENTERPRISES INC ↗
- Who funds MEDICI ROAD ↗
- Who funds MT VERNON MANOR INC ↗
- Who funds FIFTH WARD COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds QUEST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION INC ↗
- Who funds HOLOS INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY LEAGUE OF THE HEIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP OF NORTH RICHMOND ↗
- Who funds Builders of Hope CDC ↗
- Who funds DALLAS CITY HOMES INC ↗
- Who funds NEW ECONOMICS FOR WOMEN ↗
- Who funds DREAMING OUT LOUD INC ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Enterprise Community Partners Inc · Citi Foundation · The Kresge Foundation · The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation · Greater Washington Community Foundation · Eugene & Agnes E Meyer Foundation · Enterprise Community Loan Fund Inc · City First Enterprises Inc · Washington Area Community Investment Fund Inc · Fair Food Network Inc · Wells Fargo Foundation · United Way for Southeastern Michigan
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Capital Impact Partners funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Afrithrive Inc — 41% of income from government
- African American Alliance of Cdfi CEOs — 3% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.