Skip to content
Good Hope Seeders at a glance

· Private foundation

Good Hope Seeders

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.

$130k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$50k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Civil Rights$340kHuman Services$264kFood & Nutrition$255kReligion$227kInternational$97kPublic Safety & Disaster$40kHealth$13kHousing & Shelter$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $80k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$30,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CATHOLIC EXTENSION$50,000
SELF HELP FOR THE ELDERLY$30,000
CRAZY LOVE MINISTRY$25,000
PROJECT PEARLS$25,000
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 (FY17–24, $214k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CHINESE CHRISTIAN HERALD CRUSADES: $10k → 10%SACRAMENTO LOAVES AND FISHES: $10k → 12%CHINESE CHRISTIAN HERALD CRUSADES: $10k → 10%UNION GOSPEL MISSION SACRAMENTO: $5k → 12%CHINESE CHRISTIAN HERALD CRUSADES: $5k → 10%UNION GOSPEL MISSION SACRAMENTO: $2k → 12%SELF HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $30k → 10%SELF HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $22k → 10%SELF HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $20k → 10%SELF HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $20k → 10%SELF HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $20k → 10%SELF HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $20k → 10%SELF HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $20k → 10%SELF HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $20k → 10%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.
$1.2M · 13 repeat orgs$45k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
6

Total granted

$1.2M
$45k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+33%

Still filing today

31%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

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

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHealthAnimalsInternationalOther
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

  • SF
    SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY
    8× · 2017–2024 · $172k · revenue +72%
  • PP
    PROJECT PEARLS USA INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $67k · revenue +6%
  • CC
    CHINESE CHRISTIAN HERALD CRUSADES INC
    3× · 2019–2022 · $25k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • SL
    SACRAMENTO LOAVES & FISHESgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +33%
  • MH
    MERCY HOME FOR BOYS AND GIRLS
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • CH
    CHINESE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · 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
Mission Hospice & Home Care Inc

Delivering compassionate support and exceptional care in the home for individuals and communities, guiding them with choice and dignity to navigate significant care decisions.

Human Services
2
Asian Health Services

Asian Health Services (AHS) provides a continuum of medical care, mental health care, dental care and other healthcare services for all, including health education; perinatal services; behavioral health; family and youth services;…

Health
3
Los Angeles Christian Health Centers

The mission of los angeles christian health centers is to follow christ by loving and serving our neighbors through the provision of comprehensive quality healthcare. our vision is the healing and restoration of homeless and underserved…

Health
4
Church of the Valley Retirement Homes

Valley village encourages seniors to live at their highest level of independence and personal dignity by providing modestly priced and well-established housing with a variety of services.

—
5
Channing House

Channing house believes that older adults thrive in a vibrant setting that supports active, engaged and healthy living. our mission is to provide a sustainable, innovative community that promotes this lifestyle, while embracing respect and…

Human Services
6
Cchnc South Lake Towers Inc

Operates a 130 unit apartment complex specifically for low and moderate income elderly persons located in oakland, california.

Housing & Shelter
7
St Helena Hospital

Living God's love by inspiring health, wholeness and hope.

Health
8
Artesia Christian Home Inc

Health care for the aged

Human Services
9
Adventist Health Clearlake Hospital Inc

Living God's love by inspiring health, wholeness and hope.

Health
10
The Health Trust

The mission is to build health equity in silicon valley.

Health
11
Union Rescue Mission

Union rescue mission embraces people with the compassion of christ. we assist people experiencing homelessness by providing a comprehensive array of emergency and long-term services to our guests, including: food, shelter, clothing,…

Human Services
12
Herald Christian Health Center

The mission of the organization is to provide free or low cost medical, dental, behavioral health care services, and enrollment services to the communities we served. the organization also provides cancer screening, preventative education,…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Union Gospel Mission; the most unlike its peers is One Hit Away Foundation. 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 19 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)
0
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

USCCA: $340,000 · OtherUSCCACATHOLIC CHURCH EXTENSION SOCIETY OF US OF AMER: $225,000 · OtherCATHOLIC CHURCH EXTENSION SOCIETY OF US OF AMERCRAZY LOVE MINISTRY: $187,000 · OtherCRAZY LOVE MINISTRYRONALD MCDONALD HOUSE: $50,000 · OtherCATHOLIC RELIEF SERVICES: $40,000 · Other+7 more: $112,500 · Other+7 moreSELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $172,000 · Human ServicesSELF-HELP FOR THE E…CHINESE CHRISTIAN HERALD CRUSADES INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesCHINESE CHRISTIAN H…SACRAMENTO LOAVES & FISHES: $10,000 · Human Services+1 more: $7,000 · Human ServicesPROJECT PEARLS USA INC: $67,000 · InternationalCHINESE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION: $10,000 · HealthSACRAMENTO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $2,000 · Animals
Other$954,500Human Services$214,000International$67,000Health$10,000Animals$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 budgetSELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY: $172,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetPROJECT PEARLS USA INC: $67,000 over 4y, 6.7% of budgetCHINESE CHRISTIAN HERALD CRUSADES INC: $25,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetCHINESE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNION GOSPEL MISSION: $7,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetONE HIT AWAY FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetSACRAMENTO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds SELF-HELP FOR THE ELDERLY ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT PEARLS USA INC ↗
  • Who funds CHINESE CHRISTIAN HERALD CRUSADES INC ↗
  • Who funds SACRAMENTO LOAVES & FISHES ↗
  • Who funds CHINESE HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds UNION GOSPEL MISSION ↗
  • Who funds ONE HIT AWAY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SACRAMENTO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS ↗

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.

The Blackbaud Giving …Charities Aid Foundat…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Morgan Stanley Global…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Paypal Charitable Giv…Natl Christian Charit…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Blackbaud Giving FundSC11.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Good Hope Seeders funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Good Hope Seeders. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%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 · 0–5%
    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 19 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 Good Hope Seeders’ 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