Skip to content
Communities of Concern Commission at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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.

$6k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$6k
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, FY2020 to 2024.

Housing & Shelter$639kFood & Nutrition$250kArts & Culture$123kHuman Services$104kCommunity Improvement$47kEmployment$27k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$6,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$500k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Asia Pacific Cultural Center$6,000
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 (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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%El Centro de la Raza: $27k → 9%Chief Seattle Club: $150k → 9%Chief Seattle Club: $100k → 9%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 19% of Communities of Concern Commission’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 100% of the giving stays in WA; by stated purpose, 71%.

Communities of Concern Commissionlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 23% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

65%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$770k · 6 repeat orgs$420k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +84% since the first grant, against +69% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
7

Total granted

$770k
$420k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+84%
+69%

Still filing today

100%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterArts & CulturePublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementCivil RightsOther
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

  • EC
    Ethiopian Community in Seattle
    4× · 2020–2023 · $201k · revenue +84%
  • FF
    FOUNDATION FOR HOMELESS AND POVERTY MANAGEMENT
    2× · 2021–2022 · $86k · revenue +326% · 36% of their budget
  • UI
    UNITED INDIANS OF ALL TRIBES FOUNDATION
    2× · 2020–2021 · $77k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • IF
    INSTITUTE FOR WASHINGTONS FUTURE
    one grant, 2020 · $250k · revenue +11%
  • SO
    Survival of American Indians Association
    one grant, 2020 · $63k
  • WS
    Washington State Rural Development Councilgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $40k · revenue +592% · 53% of their budget
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
Seattle Indian Center
Human Services
2
Central Washington Hispanic Chamber of Commerce

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.

Community Improvement
3
Wakulima Usa

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…

Food & Nutrition
4
Lao Community Service Center

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.

Human Services
5
Comunidades Sin Fronteras Washington

To provide services needed in the community

Community Improvement
6
Washington Ethnic Studies Now

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…

Education
7
Washington Indian Civil Rights Commission

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…

Human Services
8
Rainier Beach Cummunity Empowerment Coalition

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 Improvement
9
Eritrean Association in Greater Seattle

Community Services

Human Services
10
Sage Indigenous Law Center

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.

Crime & Legal
11
Cowlitz Economic Development Council

Foster Growth in the Community

—
12
Coast Salish Youth Coalition

To cultivate the next generation of culturally engaged environmental stewards.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is African Community Housing & Development; 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.
05the grantee network

11 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. 11 of the 13 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
9/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

INSTITUTE FOR WASHINGTONS FUTURE: $249,874 · OtherINSTITUTE FOR WASHINGTONS FUTUREUNITED INDIANS OF ALL TRIBES FOUNDATION: $76,704 · OtherUNITED INDIANS OF ALL TRIBES FOUNDATI…Survival of American Indians Association: $62,843 · OtherSurvival of American Indians Associat…+1 more: $7,000 · OtherCHIEF SEATTLE CLUB: $249,889 · Human ServicesCHIEF SEATTLE CLUBEL CENTRO DE LA RAZA: $27,112 · Human ServicesEL CENTRO DE LA RAZAEthiopian Community in Seattle: $200,932 · Arts & CultureEthiopian Community in S…Asia Pacific Cultural Center: $60,001 · Arts & CultureAsia Pacific Cultural Ce…LHAQ'TEMISH FOUNDATION: $96,771 · Public BenefitLHAQ'TEMI…FOUNDATION FOR HOMELESS AND POVERTY MANAGEMENT: $85,850 · Housing & ShelterAFRICAN COMMUNITY HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT: $5,500 · Housing & ShelterWashington State Rural Development Council: $40,000 · Community ImprovementLATINO CIVIC ALLIANCE: $27,200 · Civil Rights
Other$396,421Human Services$277,001Arts & Culture$260,933Public Benefit$96,771Housing & Shelter$91,350Community Improvement$40,000Civil Rights$27,200

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCHIEF SEATTLE CLUB: $249,889 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR WASHINGTONS FUTURE: $249,874 over 1y, 18% of budgetEthiopian Community in Seattle: $200,932 over 4y, 11% of budgetLHAQ'TEMISH FOUNDATION: $96,771 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR HOMELESS AND POVERTY MANAGEMENT: $85,850 over 2y, 36% of budgetUNITED INDIANS OF ALL TRIBES FOUNDATION: $76,704 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetAsia Pacific Cultural Center: $60,001 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetWashington State Rural Development Council: $40,000 over 1y, 53% of budgetLATINO CIVIC ALLIANCE: $27,200 over 1y, 29% of budgetEL CENTRO DE LA RAZA: $27,112 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetAFRICAN COMMUNITY HOUSING & DEVELOPMENT: $5,500 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Seattle FoundationInatai FoundationPhilanthropy NorthwestCatholic Community Se…Washington Progress F…Front and CenteredWhatcom Community Fou…The Satterberg Founda…Puget Sound Energy Fo…Gs Donor Advised Phil…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …
Seattle FoundationWA20.5× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Communities of Concern Commission funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Communities of Concern Commission. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 13 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 Communities of Concern Commission’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