Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Hope Enterprise Corporation

To strengthen the financial health of people in under-resourced deep south communities.

$732k
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Community Improvement$8.0MHuman Services$4.1MPublic Safety & Disaster$1.0MHousing & Shelter$499kFood & Nutrition$232kEmployment$174kHealth$128kYouth Development$85kOther$0
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $51k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $24k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $650k
$10,001
Median grant
7
States reached
$166M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HOPE FEDERAL CREDIT UNION$200,000
ALTCAP$140,000
PEOPLE TRUST$140,000
CANSECO PROPERTIES FILMORE LLC$100,000
COMMUNITITES UNLIMITED INC$70,000
CAPITAL CITY MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION LLC$14,246
CUPCAKE CUTIE ETC LLC$10,001
SIGNATURE TRUSSEES LLC$9,838
TM HEALTH & FITNESS$7,778
THE BROLIN ROCHELLE BRAND$7,274
FOOD4THOUGHT CONSULTING LLC$7,248
LASHERYL COACHING AND COUNSELING$6,888
BEAS BAYOU USA LLC$6,203
TIME TO SPRING FORWARD LLC$6,114
02The need
03

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 (FY21–23, $232k) land where the poverty rate runs at 28%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 78% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%NEW WAY MISSISSIPPI: $50k → 11%WE2GETHER: $182k → 32%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

MO
AR
TN
NC
DC
LA
MS
AL
TX

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 — 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.

39%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$5.6M · 4 repeat orgs$8.7M to everyone else

4 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 12 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
107

Total granted

$5.6M
$8.3M

Still filing today

0%
6%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $426k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’20’21’22’23’24
Community ImprovementHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentOther

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

  • HF
    HOPE FEDERAL CREDIT UNION
    6× · 2017–2024 · $5.0M
  • M
    MARKETFARE
    3× · 2019–2021 · $300k
  • CP
    CANSECO PROPERTIES FILMORE LLC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $200k

Funded once

  • NC
    NATIONAL COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT COALITION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5.0M · revenue +565% · 83% of their budget
  • P
    POSIGEN
    one grant, 2021 · $1.0M
  • JM
    JACKSON METRO SPONSORING COMMITTEE-WORKI D/B/A WORKING TOGETHER JACKSONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $200k · revenue +73% · 96% of their budget

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
East Mississippi Development Corporation Meridian Community College
2
Acc Capital Inc

Acc capital is a private nonprofit financial leader on a mission for economic change. we are dedicated to empowering entrepreneurs and uplifting communities with accessible loans, resources, and over 68 years of experience.

3
Gulf Coast Business Council

The organization is organized to address the common economic and business interests of the mississippi gulf coast by identifying issues, convening resources, framing public policy, finding solutions, and working to improve the business…

Community Improvement
4
North Missindustrial Development a

Promoting northeast mississippi for industrial growth.

5
Mid City Redevelopment Alliance

Mid-city redevelopment alliance is a chartered member of the neighborworks america network of excellence. the 250-member network operates using best practices that ensure strong business operations, organized and strategic data management,…

Community Improvement
6
Revitalize Mississippi Inc
Community Improvement
7
Jackson County Economic Development Foundation Inc

Improving the economic development opportunities of jackson county, mississippi by unifying planning, economic & industrial development, and marketing activities in the county.

Community Improvement
8
Economic Development Center of Washington County Inc

To promote and assist in economic development, job creation and job training for washington county, ms and surrounding areas. to promote and assist existing businesses in the area.

Community Improvement
9
Southern Bancorp Capital Partners

Creating economic opportunities in distressed rural communities.

10
Urban League of Louisiana

To empower communities and help change liver for african americans and other emerging communities and groups. the urban league seeks to eliminate barriers to opportunity and assist individuals in attaining economic self sufficiency.

Human Services
11
Jackson County Economic Alliance

To bring economic development to its fullest potential, for job growth in jackson county, as well as develop a strong core of resources for the future.

Community Improvement
12
Community Lift Corp

Community LIFT Corporation (Community LIFT) is a non profit community development intermediary whose mission is to revitalize neighborhoods through strategic investment in the areas of human capacity-building and economic and community…

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jackson Metro Sponsoring Committee-Worki D/B/a Working Together Jackson and the most unlike its peers is Mary Reynolds Babcock Foundation Incorporated. 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

12 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 123 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
7/12
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

HOPE FEDERAL CREDIT UNION — $5,005,000 · OtherHOPE FEDERAL CREDIT UNIONPOSIGEN — $1,000,000 · OtherPOSIGENMARKETFARE — $300,000 · Other+112 more — $2,116,985 · Other+112 moreNATIONAL COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT COALITION INC — $5,000,000 · Community ImprovementNATIONAL COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT COALITION I…JACKSON METRO SPONSORING COMMITTEE-WORKI D/B/A WORKING TOGETHER JACKSON — $200,000 · Community Improvement+3 more — $287,934 · Community ImprovementWe2gether Creating Change — $182,413 · Human ServicesNEW WAY MISSISSIPPI INC — $50,000 · Human ServicesPEOPLE TRUST — $140,000 · Youth Development
Other$8,421,985Community Improvement$5,487,934Human Services$232,413Youth Development$140,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNATIONAL COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT COALITION INC — $5,000,000 over 1y, 83% of budgetJACKSON METRO SPONSORING COMMITTEE-WORKI D/B/A WORKING TOGETHER JACKSON — $200,000 over 1y, 96% of budgetWe2gether Creating Change — $182,413 over 1y, 17% of budgetPEOPLE TRUST — $140,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetALTCAP — $140,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetEAST ARKANSAS ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY — $77,934 over 1y, 14% of budgetCOMMUNITIES UNLIMITED INC — $70,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNEW WAY MISSISSIPPI INC — $50,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budget
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 NATIONAL COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT COALITION INC
  • Who funds JACKSON METRO SPONSORING COMMITTEE-WORKI D/B/A WORKING TOGETHER JACKSON
  • Who funds We2gether Creating Change
  • Who funds PEOPLE TRUST
  • Who funds ALTCAP
  • Who funds EAST ARKANSAS ENTERPRISE COMMUNITY
  • Who funds COMMUNITIES UNLIMITED INC
  • Who funds NEW WAY MISSISSIPPI INC
  • Who funds MARY REYNOLDS BABCOCK FOUNDATION INCORPORATED

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.

WK Kellogg FoundationMI10.1× affinity6 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: WK Kellogg Foundation · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 organization Hope Enterprise Corporation 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%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
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 123 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph