· Public charity
Center for Responsible Lending
Promoting financial fairness and economic opportunity for all, ending abusive lending practices.
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.
The 11 grants below total $145,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $158,166 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $13,166 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $13k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $82k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SaverLife | $50,000 |
| Center for Public Justice | $12,000 |
| National Association of Real Estate | $10,000 |
| Alaska Public Interest Research Gro | $10,000 |
| CommEconomic Develop Asso Michigan | $10,000 |
| New Jersey Citizen Action Education | $10,000 |
| Center for Economic Integrity | $10,000 |
| CASH Campaign of Maryland | $10,000 |
| Economic Progress Institute | $10,000 |
| Maine Equal Justice Partners Inc | $7,500 |
| Georgia Watch | $5,500 |
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, $79k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 34% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +89% since the first grant, against +30% for the ones you funded once.
30 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 21 since wound down; 2 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, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k 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
- CECOMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION OF MICHIGAN6× · 2018–2024 · $106k · revenue +611%
- EIEARN INC2× · 2023–2024 · $75k · revenue +235%
- MCMAINE CENTER FOR ECONOMIC POLICY4× · 2018–2022 · $75k · revenue +70%
Funded once
- EFEXODUS FINANCIAL SERVICESgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $17k · revenue ×12
- VEVeterians Education Successone grant, 2021 · $15k
- HEHOPE ENTERPRISE CORPORATIONone grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue +6%
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.
Southern coalition for social justice partners with communities of color and economically disadvantaged communities across the south to defend and advance their political, social, and economic rights. through an intersectional and…
Colorado center on law and policy is an antipoverty organization advancing the rights of every coloradan.
To build a just and inclusive economy where all workers have expansive rights and thrive in good jobs.
Empowering college admission counseling professionals through education, advocacy, and community.
The legal aid justice center partners with communities and clients to achieve justice by dismantling systems that create and perpetuate poverty.
The washington area community investment fund (wacif) is a nonprofit community loan fund focused on increasing equity and economic opportunity in the washington, dc area's underserved communities. wacif's mission is driven is driven by…
Council for court excellence's (cce's) mission is to bring people together to conduct research, educate, and advocate to make d.c.'s unique legal systems more just, equitable, and accountable to the community.
Building a movement of diverse, upwardly mobile college grads overcoming underemployment through digital skills and peer connections.
The foundation works to defend and promote the constitution of the united states, focusing especially on the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth, and 14th amendments. the foundation also works to defend and promote the constitution of the…
The northwest consumer law center zealously advocates, litigates, and promotes access to justice for low and moderate income clients, and through its education programs, empowers consumers with the knowledge and resources to protect their…
A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…
To advance economic and social liberties and a free enterprise society through strategic litigation, training, communication, activism and research. in addition, the center will train law students, lawyers and policy activists in the…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nebraska Appleseed Center for Law in the Public Interest and the most unlike its peers is Alaska Public Interest Research Group. 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 29 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
47 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. 47 of the 56 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
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 COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION OF MICHIGAN ↗
- Who funds EARN INC ↗
- Who funds MAINE CENTER FOR ECONOMIC POLICY ↗
- Who funds NEW JERSEY CITIZEN ACTION EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds HACIENDA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds GEORGIA WATCH ↗
- Who funds National Coalition for Asian Pacific American Community Development ↗
- Who funds SOUTHWEST CENTER FOR ECONOMIC INTEGRITY ↗
- Who funds THE ECONOMIC PROGRESS INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds MARYLAND CONSUMER RIGHTS COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR PUBLIC JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds THE IDA AND ASSET BUILDING COLLABORATIVE OF NORTH CAROLINA ↗
- Who funds VETERANS EDUCATION SUCCESS INC ↗
- Who funds INDIANA COMMUNITY ACTION ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds NEW ECONOMY PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTH CAROLINA APPLESEED LEGAL JUSTICE CENTER ↗
- Who funds Texas Appleseed ↗
- Who funds INVEST IN LOUISIANA ↗
- Who funds PROJECT GREEN ↗
- Who funds Rise Economy ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Alaska Public Interest Research Group ↗
- Who funds THE LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds Maine Equal Justice Partners ↗
- Who funds EXODUS FINANCIAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds HOPE ENTERPRISE CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds POLICY MATTERS OHIO ↗
- Who funds BLACK HILLS COMMUNITY LOAN FUND INC ↗
- Who funds NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIPS INC ↗
- Who funds DNA PEOPLES LEGAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REAL ESTATE BROKERS INC ↗
- Who funds Michigan Advocacy Program ↗
- Who funds South Carolina Association for Community Economic Development ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL COUNCIL OF THE US SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL 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: Annie E Casey Foundation Inc · Community Catalyst Inc · Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund · Center on Budget and Policy Priorities · Hopewell Fund · New Venture Fund · The Ford Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · WK Kellogg Foundation · Tides Foundation · Economic Security Project Inc · Center for Law and Social Policy
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 Center for Responsible Lending 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.
- Hacienda Community Development Corporation — 48% of income from government
- Neighborhood Partnerships Inc — 40% of income from government
- Cash Campaign of Maryland Inc — 11% of income from government
- New Jersey Citizen Action Education Fund Inc — 9% 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.