Skip to content
Human Services Campus Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Human Services Campus Inc

Keys to Change is using the power of collaboration to create solutions to end homelessness.

$1.3M
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$250k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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.

Housing & Shelter$1.6MEducation$250kHealth$202kHuman Services$95k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $250,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,260,111 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,010,111 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.
$250,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$38M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ASU FOUNDATION$250,000
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 (FY22–22, $45k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CIRCLE THE CITY: $20k → 11%ELAINE: $25k → 11%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
Arizona Housing Inc

The mission of arizona housing, inc. (ahi) is to assist individuals and families in attaining self-sufficiency through the provision of dignified, comprehensive housing and services. founded in 1995, ahi works to ensure everyone has a…

Housing & Shelter
2
House of Refuge Sunnyslope Inc

Our mission is to love, house, and equip men, women and children. coming from chronic unemployment, recovery, or an endless cycle of homelessness, our residents experience a clean, safe home where transforming their life can begin.…

Housing & Shelter
3
Albuquerque Health Care for the Homeless Inc

To provide caring and comprehensive health and supporting services, linking people experiencing homelessness to individual/collective solutions and to be a leader in creating service delivery models and solutions to homelessness.

Human Services
4
Community Networks Inc

Providing services to the homeless, low income individuals, and hiv/aids infected and affected individuals

Housing & Shelter
5
Adelante Healthcareinc

Mission: cultivate health by supporting individuals and the community at every step of their journey. vision: lead a future in which accessible, high-quality care sets the standard for all. adelante healthcare, a federally qualified health…

Health
6
Cplc Health Inc

Provide home healthcare services to the aging population in arizona.

Housing & Shelter
7
Community Housing Partnership Inc

Providing affordable housing for low-income families in the phoenix metro area.

Housing & Shelter
8
Westcare Arizona I Inc

To provide substance abuse prevention and treatment.

Community Improvement
9
Arizona Behavioral Health Corporation

Providing quality, affordable supportive housing for persons with behavioral health needs in maricopa county.

Unclassified
10
Terros Inc

Terros health is a whole health, whole person integrated care provider delivering physical health care with specialization in substance use recovery, mental health, prevention, wellness and family services. terros health seeks to inspire…

Unclassified
11
Old Pueblo Community Services

Established in 1996, Old Pueblo Community Services has delivered housing and support services for people facing homelessness in Pima County. The organization serves various populations, including families, veterans, youth, individuals with…

Philanthropy
12
Our Family Services Inc

Our Family's mission is to eliminate homelessness and strengthen our community. We do this by providing stability in times of crisis, linking people to support and resources, supporting social connectedness, engaging our neighbors to…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is A New Leaf; the most unlike its peers is Elaine. 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

11 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.

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

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/11
Grantees still filing
8/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $1,225,000 · EducationARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSI…CAMPUS OF HUMAN SERVICES LLC: $487,467 · OtherCAMPUS OF HUMAN SERVICES LL…Catholic Charities San Bernardino & Riverside Counties: $20,000 · OtherEcumenical Chaplaincy for the Homeless Inc: $20,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY BRIDGES INC: $122,826 · HealthCOMMUNITY BRI…BRIGHTER WAY INSTITUTE: $78,999 · HealthBRIGHTER WAY …A NEW LEAF: $50,000 · HealthA NEW LEAFHOMELESS ID PROJECT INC: $125,000 · ReligionElaine: $25,000 · Human ServicesCIRCLE THE CITY: $20,000 · Human ServicesCENTRAL ARIZONA SHELTER SERVICES INC: $20,000 · Housing & Shelter
Education$1,225,000Other$527,467Health$251,825Religion$125,000Human Services$45,000Housing & Shelter$20,000

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 budgetARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION FOR A NEW AMERICAN UNIVERSITY: $1,225,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCAMPUS OF HUMAN SERVICES LLC: $487,467 over 1y, 34% of budgetHOMELESS ID PROJECT INC: $125,000 over 3y, 27% of budgetCOMMUNITY BRIDGES INC: $122,826 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBRIGHTER WAY INSTITUTE: $78,999 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetA NEW LEAF: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetElaine: $25,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetCatholic Charities San Bernardino & Riverside Counties: $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCENTRAL ARIZONA SHELTER SERVICES INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCIRCLE THE CITY: $20,000 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.

Garcia Family Foundat…Arizona Community Fou…Robert Kemper Corriga…Thunderbirds CharitiesVirginia G Piper Char…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Garcia Family FoundationAZ17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Garcia Family Foundation · Arizona Community Foundation · Robert Kemper Corrigan Foundation · Thunderbirds Charities · Virginia G Piper Charitable Trust · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Human Services Campus Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Human Services Campus Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%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 · 0–40%
    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 11 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $3.6M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Human Services Campus’ 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