Skip to content

· Public charity

Ella Baker Center for Human Rights

The organization advances racial and economic justice to ensure dignity and opportunity for low-income people and people of color.

$33k
Granted FY2023
1
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$31k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Community Improvement$1.1MHuman Services$98kCivil Rights$24kCrime & Legal$8k
02FY2023 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $30,667, the rows itemized in this filing. The $32,699 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,032 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.
$30,667
Median grant
1
States reached
$22M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SILICON VALLEY DE-BUG$30,667
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 (FY22–23, $98k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%SILICON VALLEY DE-BUG: $67k → 8%SILICON VALLEY DE-BUG: $31k → 8%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 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
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
Justice Funders

Serve as a partner, educator, and guide for philanthropy in reimagining practices that advance a thriving and just world.

—
3
Oregon Justice Network

Oregon Justice Network is an alliance built and staffed by criminal legal system impacted people advocating for the well-being of people affected or at-risk of being affected by carceral systems. Our work centers around restorative…

Human Services
4
Fuerza LaboralPower of Workers

Fuerza Laboral is a workers' rights center whose mission is to shift the balance of power in our economy in favor of workers by educating, training, and organizing workers to become community leaders; taking direct action to recover unpaid…

Education
5
Fund for Justice

Fund for Justice is a nationally connected social impact research and advocacy organization that works to achieve fundamental, systemic reform by addressing policies and practicies that prevent individuals from reaching their full…

Crime & Legal
6
North Bay Jobs with Justice

North Bay Jobs with Justice (NBJWJ) is a grassroots coalition building power and winning economic and racial justice for workers on the front lines of climate change.

Civil Rights
7
Legal Link

Legal Link removes legal barriers that prolong poverty by adding critically needed capacity to the legal ecosystem.

Crime & Legal
8
NorCal Resist

We're community members organizing for a better world , and we invite you to join us. We're building infrastructure against oppression and empowering our communities through shared resources and support.

Civil Rights
9
Detention Watch Network

Detention Watch Network seeks to end the cruel system of immigration detention via programs of grassroots organizing, strategic communications, and collective advocacy.

Human Services
10
The Black Organizing Project Inc

The Black Organizing Project is a Black, member-led community organization working for racial, social, and economic justice through grassroots organizing and community building across the Bay Area.

Human Services
11
Forward Together

Forward Together is a national reproductive justice organization that centers people, families, and communities who experience reproductive oppression. They prioritize queer, trans, Black, Indigenous, and other peoples of color and utilize…

Health
12
Bay Area Organizing Committee

A broad based network of local institutions - congregations, synagogues, non-profits and civic associations - that serve as a foundation for public relationships, leadership development and action around issues that affect our communities.

Unclassified
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc; the most unlike its peers is Fathers and Families of San Joaquin. 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

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2024.

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 2024, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RESTORE OAKLAND INC: $1,051,820 · Crime & LegalRESTORE OAKLAND INC+1 more: $7,500 · Crime & LegalSilicon Valley De-Bug: $97,667 · Human ServicesSilicon V…BLACK ALLIANCE FOR JUST IMMIGRATION: $8,000 · Arts & CultureSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $8,000 · EnvironmentFathers and Families of San Joaquin: $8,000 · OtherWorkers Center For Racial Just NFP: $7,500 · Civil RightsPoder in Action: $7,500 · Public Benefit
Crime & Legal$1,059,320Human Services$97,667Arts & Culture$8,000Environment$8,000Other$8,000Civil Rights$7,500Public Benefit$7,500

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetRESTORE OAKLAND INC: $1,051,820 over 4y, 70% of budgetSilicon Valley De-Bug: $97,667 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetBLACK ALLIANCE FOR JUST IMMIGRATION: $8,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $8,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFathers and Families of San Joaquin: $8,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetWorkers Center For Racial Just NFP: $7,500 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetFAMILIES AND FRIENDS OF LOUISIANAS INCARCERATED CHILDREN: $7,500 over 1y, 1.0% 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.

Tides FoundationCA16.5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tides Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Proteus Fund Inc · Borealis Philanthropy · Tides Center · The California Endowment · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Marguerite Casey Foundation · Liberty Hill Foundation · NEO Philanthropy Inc · New Venture Fund · The San Francisco 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 Ella Baker Center for Human Rights funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ella Baker Center for Human Rights. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 8 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Ella Baker Center for Human Rights’ filings →

    More from the funding graph