Skip to content
Hood Esther Gowen Uw at a glance

· Private foundation

Hood Esther Gowen Uw

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.

$160k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$40k
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 2025.

Human Services$217kHousing & Shelter$160kReligion$105kCrime & Legal$77kEmployment$40kYouth Development$40kCommunity Improvement$15k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$40,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DEPAUL USA INC$40,000
LUTHERAN SOCIAL MISSION SOCIETY$40,000
VALLEY YOUTH HOUSE COMMITTEE$40,000
BROAD STREET MINISTRY$30,000
HOPEPHL$10,000
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 (FY20–25, $117k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 66% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%VALLEY YOUTH HOUSE COMMITTEE: $40k → 11%HOPEPHL: $10k → 22%NORTH LIGHT COMMUNITY CENTER: $12k → 22%BROAD STREET MINISTRY: $30k → 22%BROAD STREET MINISTRY BM: $25k → 22%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.

41%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$267k · 4 repeat orgs$387k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
11

Total granted

$267k
$297k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+14%
+58%

Still filing today

100%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 44% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $90k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterCrime & LegalReligionEmploymentOther
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

  • HA
    HOMELESS ADVOCACY PROJECT
    3× · 2020–2024 · $77k · revenue +26%
  • BP
    BETHESDA PROJECT
    2× · 2021–2023 · $70k · revenue +12%
  • LS
    LUTHERAN SOCIAL MISSION SOCIETY
    2× · 2022–2025 · $65k · revenue +14%

Funded once

  • JF
    JEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN SVC GREATER P
    one grant, 2024 · $50k
  • M
    MENZFITgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $40k · revenue +244%
  • EC
    EPISCOPAL COMMUNITY SERVICES ECS
    one grant, 2023 · $40k
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
Peoples Properties Inc

Homeless

—
2
Ch Pennsylvania Under - 21

Our mission is to serve children and youth facing homelessness and human trafficking, and to protect and safeguard all children. we provide trauma-informed interventions for youth who are in need.covenant house pennsylvania (chpa) remains…

Housing & Shelter
3
Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Pgh

Catholic charities serves to not only meet the immediate needs of the vulnerable within our communities but to provide solutions that embrace a path to stability for those we are privileged to serve. catholic charities is the primary…

Human Services
4
Urban Affairs Coalition

Driving change from the ground up, the urban affairs coalition (uac) unites government, business, neighborhoods, and individual initiatives to improve the quality of life in the region, build wealth in urban communities, and solve emerging…

—
5
First Light Inc

Offer those experiencing homelessness stable emergency shelter, access to housing programs, and the resources for them to achieve their full potential.

Human Services
6
1260 Housing Development Corporation

1260 housing development corporation is a not-for-profit corporation established for the purpose of developing, acquiring, financing, and managing low-income permanent housing for individuals with behavioral health issues, as well as…

Housing & Shelter
7
Family Promise of Philadelphia

To end family homelessness through direct aid, direct services, and advocacy.

Human Services
8
Committee for Dignity and Fairness for the Homeless Housing Development

Dignity Housing's mission is to break the cycle of homelessness and poverty that confronts low-income families and individuals in the City of Philadelphia.

—
9
Women Against Abuse Inc

The mission of women against abuse is to provide quality, compassionate, and nonjudgmental services in a manner that fosters self-respect and independence in persons experiencing intimate partner violence and to lead the struggle to end…

Human Services
10
Brooklyn Community Housing and Services

To provide short term, transitional and permanent housing, homelessness prevention, personalized case management, mental health care, on-site nursing, vocational training, substance abuse counseling, recreational activities and other vital…

Human Services
11
Faithful Servants Ministry

Housing the homeless

Human Services
12
Sunday Breakfast Rescue Mission

A living legacy of john wanamaker, philly house's mission is to open their doors every day with a welcoming spirit of christian compassion, walking alongside the homeless, hungry, and hurting of philadelphia so that they may experience the…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bethesda Project; the most unlike its peers is Menzfit. 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

14 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. 14 of the 18 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
9/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LUTHERAN SOCIAL MISSION SOCIETY: $65,000 · OtherLUTHERAN SOCIAL MISSION SOCIETYJEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN SVC GREATER P: $50,000 · OtherJEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN SVC GR…EPISCOPAL COMMUNITY SERVICES ECS: $40,000 · OtherEPISCOPAL COMMUNITY SERVICES ECSLUTHERAN SOCIAL MISSION SOCIETY: $25,000 · OtherLUTHERAN SOCIAL MISSION SOCIETYNUEVA ESPERANZA INC: $15,000 · OtherNUEVA ESPERANZA INCBETHESDA PROJECT: $70,000 · Housing & ShelterBETHESDA PROJECTDEPAUL USA INC: $40,000 · Housing & ShelterDEPAUL USA INCACHIEVEABILITY: $30,000 · Housing & ShelterACHIEVEABILITYNUEVA ESPERANZA INC: $15,000 · Housing & ShelterNUEVA ESPERANZA INCPATHWAYS TO HOUSING - PA: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterPATHWAYS TO HOUSING - PABROAD STREET MINISTRY: $55,000 · Human ServicesBROAD STREET MINISTRYVALLEY YOUTH HOUSE COMMITTEE INC: $40,000 · Human ServicesVALLEY YOUTH HOUSE COMMIT…BROAD STREET MINISTRY CENTER INC: $30,000 · Human ServicesBROAD STREET MINISTRY CEN…NORTH LIGHT BOYS' CLUB INC: $12,000 · Human ServicesNORTH LIGHT BOYS' CLUB IN…HOPEPHL: $10,000 · Human ServicesHOPEPHLHOMELESS ADVOCACY PROJECT: $77,000 · Crime & LegalHOMELESS ADVO…MENZFIT: $40,000 · EmploymentCHOSEN 300 MINISTRIES INC: $30,000 · Religion
Other$195,000Housing & Shelter$165,000Human Services$147,000Crime & Legal$77,000Employment$40,000Religion$30,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHOMELESS ADVOCACY PROJECT: $77,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetBETHESDA PROJECT: $70,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetLUTHERAN SOCIAL MISSION SOCIETY: $65,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetBROAD STREET MINISTRY: $55,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetDEPAUL USA INC: $40,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetACHIEVEABILITY: $30,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetBROAD STREET MINISTRY CENTER INC: $30,000 over 1y, 23% of budgetCHOSEN 300 MINISTRIES INC: $30,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetNUEVA ESPERANZA INC: $15,000 over 1y, 6.4% of budgetNORTH LIGHT BOYS' CLUB INC: $12,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetHOPEPHL: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPATHWAYS TO HOUSING - PA: $10,000 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.

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 Philadelphia Foun…W W Smith Charitable …Henry Dolfinger 2 Tru…Beatty Helen D Groome…The Leo and Peggy Pie…The Patricia Kind Fam…United Way of Greater…The Elmer R Deaver Fo…Van Ameringen Foundat…The Gordon Charter Fo…Lindback Cr & Mf Foun…Independence Foundati…
The Philadelphia FoundationPA25.3× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Philadelphia Foundation · W W Smith Charitable Trust · Henry Dolfinger 2 Trust Uw · Beatty Helen D Groome Uw · The Leo and Peggy Pierce Family Foundation Inc · The Patricia Kind Family Foundation · United Way of Greater Philadelphia and Southern New Jersey · The Elmer R Deaver Foundation Idt · Van Ameringen Foundation Inc · The Gordon Charter Foundation · Lindback Cr & Mf Foundation Tw Main · Independence 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 Hood Esther Gowen Uw funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Hood Esther Gowen Uw. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Nueva Esperanza Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 18 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 Hood Esther Gowen Uw’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