Skip to content
David B Rogers Foundation DTD 6282000 at a glance

· Private foundation

David B Rogers Foundation DTD 6282000

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$1.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$450k
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.

Health$1.6MYouth Development$826kEducation$650kHuman Services$300kReligion$275kHousing & Shelter$200k
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k6 grants · $750k
  • $250k+1 grant · $450k
$100,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$20M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Mary's Center$450,000
The Good Shepard Ministry Center$200,000
SOLIDS$150,000
East LA Women's Center$100,000
Children's Hospital of Los Angeles$100,000
Mighty Little Giants Inc$100,000
Maternal Mental Health Now$100,000
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 (FY22–22, $200k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Midnight Mission Development Dept: $200k → 14%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.

52%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.0M · 5 repeat orgs$1.9M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +13% since the first grant, against +6% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
8

Total granted

$2.0M
$1.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+6%

Still filing today

40%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $300k 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
HealthYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesOther
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

  • MC
    Mary's Center for Maternal and Child Care Inc
    2× · 2023–2024 · $850k · revenue +10%
  • TG
    The Good Shepard Ministry Center
    3× · 2022–2024 · $475k
  • S
    SOLIDS
    4× · 2021–2024 · $335k

Funded once

  • VD
    VERBUM DEI JESUIT HIGH SCHOOL
    one grant, 2022 · $650k
  • HOMEBOY INDUSTRIES
    one grant, 2023 · $300k · revenue 0%
  • THE MIDNIGHT MISSION
    one grant, 2022 · $200k · revenue +15%
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
Black Los Angeles County Client Coalition Inc

Mental health services advocacy

Human Services
2
California Black Womens Health Project

Educate and advocate to improve the health of Calfornia's black women and girls

Health
3
Homeless Childrens Network

To provide direct mental health services, psychotherapy, and counseling to homeless families in San Francisco, CA and in particular to children of such families, to provide referral services for such families and their children to other…

Human Services
4
Jwch Institute Inc

The specific purposes of this organization are:(a) to provide outpatient primary health service in underserved areas and/or for medically underserved populations as a community clinic. (b) to develop, promote, and manage health care…

Health
5
Southern Birth Justice Network

To provide midwife services and make the care accessible to all peoples - especially black, born, youth, immigrant, indigenous, lgbtq+, low income and other marginalized communities.

Human Services
6
Black Health Care Coalition

The Black Health Care Coalition purpose is to reduce health disparities through access to care health promotion and patient advocacy The organization hosts programs such as Community Baby Showers for expecting families to support their…

Health
7
African American Mens Health Clinic

Bmhc is a no wrong-door safety net program for men of color. our patients receive a head-to-toe assessment to address all possible concerns which will inform our health care professionals of the current state of your health. any validated…

Health
8
Trauma Informed La
Civil Rights
9
Center for Community Health and Well-Being Inc

To improve the health and well-being of the sacramento community and to ensure that its families and children have the best environment in which to grow and thrive.

Unclassified
10
Child Abuse Prevention Council of Sacramento

The mission of the child abuse prevention council of sacramento (capc) is to reduce child abuse and neglect.

Crime & Legal
11
Black Mental Health & Wellness
Health
12
Los Angeles Centers for Alcohol and Drug Abuse

Our Vision is to enhance the educational and economic well-being of the people we serve by means of direct human services, advocacy, and referrals.Our Mission is to save lives, unite families, and protect the community through addiction…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is East Los Angeles Women's Center; the most unlike its peers is Association of Black Women Physicians Inc. 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

10 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. 10 of the 16 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
5/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Mary's Center for Maternal and Child Care Inc: $850,000 · OtherMary's Center for Maternal and Child Care IncVERBUM DEI JESUIT HIGH SCHOOL: $650,000 · OtherVERBUM DEI JESUIT HIGH SCHOOLThe Good Shepard Ministry Center: $475,000 · OtherThe Good Shepard Ministry CenterSOLIDS: $335,000 · OtherSOLIDSRaising A Village Foundation: $165,000 · OtherRaising A Village Foundation+2 more: $36,000 · OtherChildren's Hospital Los Angeles: $200,000 · HealthChildren's Hospital Los …Children's Hospital and Healthcare Services Foundation: $200,000 · HealthChildren's Hospital and …ASSOCIATION OF BLACK WOMEN PHYSICIANS INC: $150,000 · HealthASSOCIATION OF BLACK WOM…MATERNAL MENTAL HEALTH NOW INC: $100,000 · HealthMATERNAL MENTAL HEALTH N…EAST LOS ANGELES WOMEN'S CENTER: $100,000 · HealthEAST LOS ANGELES WOMEN'S…MIGHTY LITTLE GIANTS INC: $100,000 · HealthMIGHTY LITTLE GIANTS INCHOMEBOY INDUSTRIES: $300,000 · Youth DevelopmentHOMEBOY I…THE BLACK SWAN ACADEMY INC: $20,000 · Youth DevelopmentTHE BLACK…THE MIDNIGHT MISSION: $200,000 · Human Services
Other$2,511,000Health$850,000Youth Development$320,000Human Services$200,000

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 budgetMary's Center for Maternal and Child Care Inc: $850,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetHOMEBOY INDUSTRIES: $300,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTHE MIDNIGHT MISSION: $200,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetChildren's Hospital Los Angeles: $200,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetChildren's Hospital and Healthcare Services Foundation: $200,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetASSOCIATION OF BLACK WOMEN PHYSICIANS INC: $150,000 over 1y, 58% of budgetEAST LOS ANGELES WOMEN'S CENTER: $100,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetMIGHTY LITTLE GIANTS INC: $100,000 over 1y, 35% of budgetTHE BLACK SWAN ACADEMY INC: $20,000 over 1y, 1.7% 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.

Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift FundMA4.2× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 David B Rogers Foundation DTD 6282000 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from David B Rogers Foundation DTD 6282000. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 16 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-PF 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 David B Rogers Foundation DTD 6282000’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