Loading…
· Public charity
EAST BAY COMMUNITY LAW CENTER
The largest provider of free legal services in alameda county, (continued on schedule o)assisting low income community members with housing, health, immigration, public benefits, criminal records, education rights, juvenile defense, consumer debt, homelessness, economic development and other general civil legal issues, while providing…
$221k
Granted FY2023
2
Grants
1
Communities
$59k
Largest
01What you fund
0169% classified
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2018–2023.
Community Improvement$45kHuman Services$30kYouth Development$30kCrime & Legal$29kEnvironment$15kHealth$15kOther$74k
02beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2019
protection
2020
outreach
2023
outreach
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
03FY2023 · 2 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2023
- $10k–50k1 grant · $22k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $59k
$59,056
Median grant
1
States reached
$13M
Total assets
Largest grants
- BAY AREA LEGAL AID$59,056
- LEGAL AID OF SONOMA COUNTY$21,988
02The need
04
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.
show:
Your human-services grants (FY18–18, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10% — the area typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
03Your edge
repeat funding
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.
56%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$132k · 3 repeat orgs$105k to everyone else
3 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2023, 1 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Re-uppedFunded once
Organizations
3
7
Total granted
$132k
$105k
Median revenue growth · since first grant
+170%
+242%
Still filing today
100%
100%
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
RenewedFirst-time
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
Community ImprovementHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentCrime & LegalHealthEnvironmentOther
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
- BABAY AREA LEGAL AID2× · 2020–2023 · $74k · revenue +96%
Partnership Working Families3× · 2018–2020 · $30k · revenue +170%- LALEGAL AID OF SONOMA COUNTY2× · 2020–2023 · $29k · revenue +221%
Funded once
Movement Strategy Centergraduatedone grant, 2018 · $15k · revenue +45%- YWYoung Womens Freedom Centergraduatedone grant, 2018 · $15k · revenue +579%
- RCRyse Centergraduatedone grant, 2018 · $15k · revenue +252%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
04Your field
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.
1
Jobs with Justice San Francisco
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,…
Employment
2
Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County
To fight social injustice through civil legal advocacy for people living in poverty.
Crime & Legal
3
Alliance for Asian American Justice Inc
Coordinate pro bono legal assistance for victims of anti-Asian violence
Civil Rights
4
San Francisco Trial Lawyers Assoc
To promote civil justice through education and trial advocacy.
—
5
Legal Link
Legal Link removes legal barriers that prolong poverty by adding critically needed capacity to the legal ecosystem. We embed legal navigation support in community-based settings by training and supporting frontline partners.
Crime & Legal
6
Family Violence Law Center
Family Violence Law Center ("FVLC") helps diverse communities in Alameda County heal from domestic violence and sexual assault, advocating for justice and healthy relationships. We provide survivor-centered legal and crisis intervention…
Crime & Legal
7
Movement Generation
MG nourishes analysis and strategy via political education while strengthening the ecosystem of alliances that are achieving a Just Transition. Through cultural strategy we advance a vision of ecological justice. MG is building a community…
Education
8
Asian Americans Advancing Justice -
The mission of AAAJ-ALC is to promote, advance, and represent the legal and civil rights of Asian Pacific Islander (API) communities, recognizing that social, economic, political and racial inequalities continue to exist in the United…
Crime & Legal
9
Silicon Valley De-Bug
Silicon Valley De-Bug is a grassroots community organization based in San Jose, CA comprised of young people and families from disadvangaged communities coming together to give voice to our typically unseen and unheard experiences through…
Human Services
10
California Youth Defender Center Inc
Defend youth rights by building and training a statewide defense coalition that challenges injustices, drives policy change, and champions community.
Crime & Legal
11
CalMatters
To improve Californias democracy by making its government more transparent and accountable and giving Californians the information they need to understand and engage with that government.
Civil Rights
12
Urban Peace Movement
Urban Peace Movement (UPM) launched in 2009 with a mission to build youth leadership in Oakland and Alameda Counties to transform the social conditions that drive violence and mass incarceration, issues that disproportionately impact BIPOC…
Youth Development
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Young Women's Freedom Center and the most unlike its peers is Bay Area Legal Aid. 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
10 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
10/10
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Other$73,940Community Improvement$45,000Human Services$30,000Youth Development$30,000Crime & Legal$28,505Environment$15,000Health$15,000
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 BAY AREA LEGAL AID ↗
- Who funds Partnership Working Families ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID OF SONOMA COUNTY ↗
- Who funds Movement Strategy Center ↗
- Who funds Young Womens Freedom Center ↗
- Who funds Ryse Center ↗
- Who funds CURYJ ↗
- Who funds Sustainable Markets Fdn ↗
- Who funds New Way of Life Reentry Proj ↗
- Who funds Youth Justice Coalition ↗
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.
The California Wellness FoundationCA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: The California Wellness Foundation · The California Endowment · East Bay Community Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Californians For Justice Education Fund · The Zellerbach Family Foundation · Tipping Point Community · Sierra Health Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · New Venture Fund · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals
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 organisation EAST BAY COMMUNITY LAW CENTER 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.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
05Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Young Womens Freedom Center.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
medium risk
~5 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 6 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
6 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 6.8× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 943227681 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on Young Womens Freedom Center, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- WatchFinancial stability— Roughly 5 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2023; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 1% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to East Bay Community Law Center?
Find your warmest path to East Bay Community Law Center through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines