Skip to content

· Private foundation

Gabriel Homes Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$55k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$29k
Largest
01What it funds
0192% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Housing & Shelter$270kCivil Rights$111kArts & Culture$25kReligion$17kHuman Services$12kScience & Tech$5kHealth$4kEmployment$4kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $39k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GABRIEL HOMES INC$28,500
THE ARC OF NORTHERN VIRGINIA$10,500
L'ARCHE OF GREATER WASHINGTON$5,000
SPARC$5,000
MARIAN HOMES INC$5,000
WEST FIELD HIGH SCHOOL$1,000
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 (FY17–25, $234k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 4%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 4%KOVAR: $5k → 7%KOVAR: $5k → 7%GABRIEL HOMES INC: $35k → 6%GABRIEL HOMES INC: $35k → 6%GABRIEL HOMES INC: $30k → 6%GABRIEL HOMES INC: $29k → 6%GABRIEL HOMES INC: $25k → 6%GABRIEL HOMES INC: $25k → 6%GABRIEL HOMES INC: $21k → 6%GABRIEL HOMES INC: $17k → 6%GABRIEL HOMES INC: $7k → 6%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$441k · 8 repeat orgs$16k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +70% since the first grant, against +25% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
3

Total granted

$441k
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+70%
+25%

Still filing today

63%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterEmploymentOther
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

  • GH
    GABRIEL HOMES INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $224k · revenue +174%
  • TA
    The Arc of Northern Virginia
    9× · 2017–2025 · $111k · revenue +110%
  • KC
    KOVAR CORPORATION
    2× · 2021–2023 · $10k · revenue +70%

Funded once

  • MI
    MVLE INC
    one grant, 2019 · $4k · revenue -19%
  • DI
    DIDLAKE INC
    one grant, 2019 · $4k · revenue +25%
  • WG
    Women Giving Back Incgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $2k · revenue +249%
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
Viability Inc

Viability's mission is to build a world in which individuals with disabilities and other disadvantages realize acceptance, inclusion, and access.

Employment
2
Diversified Services Inc

To provide training and independent living skills to individuals with development disabilities so they may become as self-reliant as possible and lead more meaningful lives in the community.

Employment
3
Abilities Richmond Inc

Abilities richmond envisions a world where all individuals with developmental disabilities and other barriers will have the opportunity to participate in a full range of life activities. competitive employment in support of this vision.

Human Services
4
Depaul Community Resources

Depaul serves children and families involved in the child welfare system and children and adults with developmental disabilities. vision: opening doors to hope and belonging. corporate mission: we work to support the success of our cients…

—
5
Jmiahs Place

Provided services for adults with disabilities ages 18 and above. We provide training and preparation, on the job training, and, job search assistance

Employment
6
Fulfillment House Inc
Health
7
Virginia Institute of Autism Inc

The virginia institute of autism is dedicated to helping people overcome the challenges of autism through innovative, evidence-based programs in education, outreach and adult services.

Philanthropy
8
Spectrum Support Inc

To form relationships which support people to achieve their life goals in the areas of residential, employment, meaningful community engagement and personal services.

Employment
9
Noahs House

The organization provides opportunities for growth, independence, and fulfillment for adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities by offering a loving, nurturing, and affordable residential community, along with structured…

Housing & Shelter
10
Supporting Individuals Wdisabilites

Support to indivduals with disabilities

Human Services
11
Opportunities Unlimited Inc

A nonprofit organized for the purpose of providing evaluation, training, employment, education, placement and support services to individuals with emotional, physical and developmental disabilities, including people with severe…

Employment
12
Individual Advocacy Group Inc

Iag's mission is to aid & provide customized services to both children and adults with disabilities, and their families, to live normal lives in the community, to remain in a community home, live independently and actively participate in…

Civil Rights
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Arc of Northern Virginia; the most unlike its peers is Women Giving Back 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

8 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. 8 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GABRIEL HOMES INC: $223,500 · Human ServicesGABRIEL HOMES INCKOVAR CORPORATION: $10,000 · Human Services+1 more: $4,000 · Human ServicesThe Arc of Northern Virginia: $110,500 · OtherThe Arc of Northern VirginiaL'ARCHE OF GREATER WASHINGTON: $24,500 · OtherL'ARCHE OF GREATER WASHINGTONJILLS HOUSE INC: $12,000 · OtherJILLS HOUSE INCIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+4 more: $14,000 · Other+4 moreMARIAN HOMES INC: $46,500 · Housing & ShelterMARIAN HOME…Women Giving Back Inc: $2,000 · Employment
Human Services$237,500Other$171,000Housing & Shelter$46,500Employment$2,000

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 budgetGABRIEL HOMES INC: $223,500 over 9y, 2.8% of budgetThe Arc of Northern Virginia: $110,500 over 9y, 1.1% of budgetMARIAN HOMES INC: $46,500 over 9y, 1.4% of budgetKOVAR CORPORATION: $10,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetMVLE INC: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDIDLAKE INC: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SAFE CHILDREN FOUNDATION: $4,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWomen Giving Back Inc: $2,000 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.

  • Who funds GABRIEL HOMES INC ↗
  • Who funds The Arc of Northern Virginia ↗
  • Who funds MARIAN HOMES INC ↗
  • Who funds KOVAR CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds MVLE INC ↗
  • Who funds DIDLAKE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE SAFE CHILDREN FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Women Giving Back Inc ↗

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.

Kovar CorporationVA15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Kovar Corporation · The Neall Family Charitable Foundation · Philip L Graham Fund co Graham Holdings Company · The Community Foundation for Northern Virginia Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Gabriel Homes Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Gabriel Homes Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Gabriel Homes’ filings →

    More from the funding graph