Skip to content
Central Ohio Community Improvement at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Central Ohio Community Improvement

To stabilize or increase property values in areas of Franklin County suffering from the effects of blighted, vacant, abandoned, tax-foreclosed or economically-stranded properties and to promote and facilitate rehabilitation, reutilization and return to productive status.

$199k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$37k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Housing & Shelter$1.9MCommunity Improvement$876kReligion$131kFood & Nutrition$123kHealth$60kAnimals$55kHuman Services$25kEnvironment$20kOther$0
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $67,375, the rows itemized in this filing. The $199,493 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $132,118 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.
$37,375
Median grant
1
States reached
$16M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Homes on the Hill$37,375
Homeport Voice & Vision$30,000
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 (FY19–19, $60k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%Integrated Community Enterprises: $60k → 15%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.

71%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.3M · 9 repeat orgs$939k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
6

Total granted

$2.3M
$939k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+84%
+85%

Still filing today

89%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
Community ImprovementReligionHousing & ShelterHuman ServicesPhilanthropyEnvironmentOther
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

  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY - MIDOHIO
    6× · 2019–2024 · $800k · revenue +84%
  • HO
    Homes on The Hill Community Development Corp
    6× · 2019–2024 · $639k · revenue +31% · 37% of their budget
  • CD
    COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR ALL PEOPLE
    3× · 2019–2021 · $418k · revenue +49%

Funded once

  • OC
    OHIO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCE FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $400k · revenue +85%
  • PA
    PARSONS AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
    one grant, 2022 · $231k · revenue -81% · 71% of their budget
  • MF
    Mid-Ohio Foodbank
    one grant, 2020 · $123k · revenue +5%
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
Columbus Housing Initiative Inc

Stabilize neighborhoods through establishing financing, education, rehabilitation of existing housing and development of new housing

Housing & Shelter
2
The Affordable Housing Trust for Columbus and Franklin County

Facilitate and invest in developments designed to: create and preserve affordable homeownership and rental housing; strengthen and stabilize neighborhoods; support working households, seniors and special needs populations.

Housing & Shelter
3
Community Shelter Board

The community shelter board is ending homelessness by creating collaborations, innovating solutions, and investing in quality programs.

—
4
Ohio Housing Council

To advocate and educate on behalf of our members to increase the quality and supply of affordable housing in the state of ohio, and to provide our members with current legislative awareness, a forum for voicing legislative and programmatic…

Community Improvement
5
Columbus Compact Corporation

Columbus compact is a catalyst for positive development of central city columbus' neighborhoods and business districts.

Community Improvement
6
Central Ohio Community Improvement

To stabilize or increase property values in areas of Franklin County suffering from the effects of blighted, vacant, abandoned, tax-foreclosed or economically-stranded properties and to promote and facilitate rehabilitation, reutilization…

Community Improvement
7
Ohio United Way

To strengthen the capacity of United Ways across Ohio and to advance the common good for Ohioans.

Philanthropy
8
Central Ohio Community Land Trust Corporation

To support permanent affordabe housing in Franklin County by providing single residential, multi-family and multi-use properties to be held as community assets in perpetuity.

Housing & Shelter
9
Central Ohio Workers Center Inc

The Central Ohio Worker Center is a non-profit organization that educates, empowers, and advocates for and with low-wage and immigrant workers in Central Ohio.

Civil Rights
10
Cincinnati Development Fund

To strengthen underserved neighborhoods and improve lives through innovative financing.

Housing & Shelter
11
Empowering and Strengthening Ohio's People Inc

Empowering and strengthening ohio's people (esop) helps adults in all stages of life achieve and maintain financial wellness and housing stability.

Housing & Shelter
12
Ohio Conference of Community Development Inc

Occd's purpose is to develop, implement and improve federal, state and local programs for community development and to develop and improve the professional standards and practices of all phases of public administration which are related…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ohio Community Development Finance Fund; the most unlike its peers is The Starfish Alliance Incorporated. 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 15 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/13
Grantees still filing
10/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Homes on The Hill Community Development Corp: $638,875 · Community ImprovementHomes on The Hill Community Development CorpOHIO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCE FUND: $400,000 · Community ImprovementOHIO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCE FUNDPARSONS AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $231,187 · Community ImprovementPARSONS AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONGertrude Wood Community Foundation: $120,000 · Community ImprovementGertrude Wood Community FoundationFRANKLINTON DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $75,000 · Community ImprovementHABITAT FOR HUMANITY - MIDOHIO: $800,000 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY - MIDOHIOMid-Ohio Foodbank: $122,500 · OtherMid-Ohio FoodbankMID OHIO REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION: $100,000 · OtherMID OHIO REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSIONThe Starfish Alliance Incorporated: $55,000 · Other+1 more: $25,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR ALL PEOPLE: $417,500 · ReligionCOMMUNITY DEVE…COLUMBUS HOUSING PARTNERSHIP INC: $172,500 · Housing & ShelterINTEGRATED SERVICES FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH: $60,000 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COLLABORATIVE OF GREATER COLUMBUS: $50,000 · PhilanthropyOHIO LAND BANK ASSOCIATION: $20,000 · Environment
Community Improvement$1,465,062Other$1,102,500Religion$417,500Housing & Shelter$172,500Human Services$60,000Philanthropy$50,000Environment$20,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY - MIDOHIO: $800,000 over 6y, 3.1% of budgetHomes on The Hill Community Development Corp: $638,875 over 6y, 37% of budgetCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR ALL PEOPLE: $417,500 over 3y, 5.8% of budgetOHIO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINANCE FUND: $400,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetPARSONS AVENUE REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $231,187 over 1y, 71% of budgetCOLUMBUS HOUSING PARTNERSHIP INC: $172,500 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetMid-Ohio Foodbank: $122,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGertrude Wood Community Foundation: $120,000 over 3y, 34% of budgetFRANKLINTON DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION: $75,000 over 3y, 5.9% of budgetINTEGRATED SERVICES FOR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH: $60,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe Starfish Alliance Incorporated: $55,000 over 3y, 22% of budgetCOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COLLABORATIVE OF GREATER COLUMBUS: $50,000 over 2y, 5.2% of budgetOHIO LAND BANK ASSOCIATION: $20,000 over 2y, 23% 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.

Central Ohio Communit…United Way of Central…Columbus FoundationOhio Capital Impact C…Community Development…Ohio Community Develo…The Affordable Housin…Harry C Moores Founda…Charities Aid Foundat…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Amazonsmile Foundation
Central Ohio Community Land Trust CorporationOH26.4× affinity10 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Central Ohio Community Land Trust Corporation · United Way of Central Ohio Inc · Columbus Foundation · Ohio Capital Impact Corporation · Community Development Collaborative of Greater Columbus · Ohio Community Development Finance Fund · The Affordable Housing Trust for Columbus and Franklin County · Harry C Moores Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · 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 Central Ohio Community Improvement funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Central Ohio Community Improvement. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 15 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 Central Ohio Community Improvement’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