· Public charity
Communities of Concern Commission
CoCC's mission is to assist various organizations serving communities of color in urban and rural areas in their efforts to conceive, design, finance, construct and manage assets essential to reducing poverty including affordable housing and community facilities.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Asia Pacific Cultural Center | $6,000 |
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 (FY20–22, $277k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% 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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 19% of Communities of Concern Commission’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 100% of the giving stays in WA; read by stated purpose it is 71% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +84% since the first grant, against +69% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- ECEthiopian Community in Seattle4× · 2020–2023 · $201k · revenue +84%
- FFFOUNDATION FOR HOMELESS AND POVERTY MANAGEMENT2× · 2021–2022 · $86k · revenue +326% · 36% of their budget
- UIUNITED INDIANS OF ALL TRIBES FOUNDATION2× · 2020–2021 · $77k · revenue +18%
Funded once
- IFINSTITUTE FOR WASHINGTONS FUTUREone grant, 2020 · $250k · revenue +11%
- SOSurvival of American Indians Associationone grant, 2020 · $63k
- WSWashington State Rural Development Councilgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $40k · revenue +592% · 53% of their budget
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.
We increase access to economic opportunities for business owners, entrepreneurs, and individuals in Central Washington by connecting and providing them with resources, representation, and opportunities to build community.
Our Food Production Center will serve as our primary storage production and distribution facility. The coop will aggregate purchase store and distribute farm inputs for members and will act as an integrator collecting the output from…
Lao Community Service center's mission is to united the Lao Community in the Pacific Northwest. We assist the Lao Community with social, cultural, and educational services.
To provide services needed in the community
Washington Ethnic Studies Now WAESN is a multigenerational majority POC-led nonprofit advancing Ethnic Studies and racial justice in Washington. We center people of color build youth-centered leadership and learning and organize…
Washington Indian Civil Rights Commission is led by and for Indigenous people, and envisions a just society in which we are treated with honor, fairness and respect. Our mission is to uphold our individual civil rights through education…
Rainier Beach Action Coalition is a grassroot, Black-led organization devoted to locally driven development. It promotes quality education, living wage jobs, affordable transportation and housing, and building community capacity in…
Community Services
Sage Indigenous Law Center's mission is to provide culturally grounded civil legal aid that protects the rights of Native American parents, children, and communities, while advancing justice and addressing systemic inequities.
Foster Growth in the Community
To cultivate the next generation of culturally engaged environmental stewards.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is African Community Housing & Development and the most unlike its peers is Foundation for Homeless and Poverty Management. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 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. 11 of the 13 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 CHIEF SEATTLE CLUB ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE FOR WASHINGTONS FUTURE ↗
- Who funds Ethiopian Community in Seattle ↗
- Who funds LHAQ'TEMISH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR HOMELESS AND POVERTY MANAGEMENT ↗
- Who funds UNITED INDIANS OF ALL TRIBES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Asia Pacific Cultural Center ↗
- Who funds Washington State Rural Development Council ↗
- Who funds LATINO CIVIC ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds EL CENTRO DE LA RAZA ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN COMMUNITY HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT ↗
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: Seattle Foundation · Inatai Foundation · Philanthropy Northwest · Catholic Community Services of Western Washington · Washington Progress Fund · Front and Centered · Whatcom Community Foundation · The Satterberg Foundation Inc · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Communities of Concern Commission 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.
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.