Skip to content
Jack London Improvement District at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Jack London Improvement District

Our mission is to create, promote and maintain an inviting environment for people who visit, live or work in the jack london district, and build an inclusive and resilient commercial community...

$186k
Granted FY2023
11
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2023 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $176,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $185,900 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $9,400 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.
$14,700
Median grant
1
States reached
$846k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ROCKRIDGE DISTRICT ASSOCIATION$24,700
OAKLAND CHINATOWN IMPROVEMENT COUNC$20,000
KOREATOWN NORTHGATE IMPROVEMENT DIS$20,000
TEMESCALTELEGRAPH AVENUE COMMUNITY$20,000
LAUREL DISTRICT$14,700
MONTCLAIR VILLAGE ASSOCIATION$14,700
DIMOND IMPROVEMENT ASSOC$14,700
GRAND AVE MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION$14,700
PIEDMONT MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION$13,000
CHILDREN'S FAIRYLAND$10,000
LAKESHORE AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEME$10,000
02The need
02

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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY23–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%OAKLAND CHINATOWN IMPROVEMENT COUNC: $20k → 10%GRAND AVE MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION: $15k → 10%LAKESHORE AVENUE BUSINESS IMPROVEME: $10k → 10%CHILDREN'S FAIRYLAND: $10k → 10%KOREATOWN NORTHGATE IMPROVEMENT DIS: $20k → 10%LAUREL DISTRICT: $15k → 10%TEMESCALTELEGRAPH AVENUE COMMUNITY: $20k → 10%MONTCLAIR VILLAGE ASSOCIATION: $15k → 10%DIMOND IMPROVEMENT ASSOC: $15k → 10%PIEDMONT MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION: $13k → 10%ROCKRIDGE DISTRICT ASSOCIATION: $25k → 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 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
Downtown Berkeley Association

The Downtown Berkely Assocaition works to strengthen the Downtown as a vibrant and welcoming urban destination for arts, culture, and commerce through effective advocacy, prmotion and direct services.

—
2
Oakland Vietnamese Chamber of Commerce

Provide resources and assistance to vietnamese small businesses and community in oakland area

Community Improvement
3
Jack London Improvement District

Our mission is to create, promote and maintain an inviting environment for people who visit, live or work in the jack london district, and build an inclusive and resilient commercial community... (see schedule o)

Community Improvement
4
Civic Center Community Benefit District

The civic center cbd improves and promotes san francisco's historic civic center through a host of planning, policy and public programming initiatives.

Community Improvement
5
Invest in Our Oakland

The committee ran a campaign supporting Oakland Ballot Measure T that would modernize Oaklands outdated regressive business tax structure to hold big wealthy corporations accountable to paying their fair share of taxes and would provide…

—
6
Oakland Chinatown Chamber of Commerce Inc

To promote vitality and growth to businesses and advocate for the Oakland Chinatown community

—
7
Olympia Downtown Alliance

Serve as a catalyst for a vibrant and thriving downtown through service to business and property owners

Arts & Culture
8
Vancouvers Downtown Association

Incorporated in 1989, Vancouver's Downtown Association (VDA) is a designated Washington Main Street Program that engages in revitalization efforts to keep downtown vibrant. Our initiatives aim to create an appealing employment center,…

Community Improvement
9
Ocean Avenue Association

The Ocean Avenue Association advances the common good, general welfare, and quality of life for all residents and visitors of the District by enhancing its environmental quality and beauty in and around the District and by reinforcing the…

Community Improvement
10
Kelseyville Business Association

The Kelseyville Business Association works to maintain our town as a safe, clean, attractive place in which to live and an appealing destination to visit. It promotes economic growth through solicitation of new businesses, patronizing…

Community Improvement
11
Mission Merchants Association Incorporated

To promote, get more vital public services and media coverage for mission district businesses in the city of san francisco.

—
12
Downtown Oakland Association

The downtown oakland association is a community benefit district (cbd) management corporation committed to revitalizing oakland's historic downtown by maintaining cleanliness and order in the public rights-of-way, improving district…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Dimond Improvement Association; the most unlike its peers is Oakland Childrens Fairyland Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

9 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. 9 of the 11 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ROCKRIDGE DISTRICT ASSOCIATION: $24,700 · Community ImprovementROCKRIDGE DISTRICT ASSOCIATIONTEMESCAL TELEGRAPH AVENUE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION: $20,000 · Community ImprovementTEMESCAL TELEGRAPH AVENUE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONKOREA TOWN OAKLAND: $20,000 · Community ImprovementKOREA TOWN OAKLANDOakland Chinatown Improvement Council: $20,000 · Community ImprovementOakland Chinatown Improvement CouncilDIMOND IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION: $14,700 · Community ImprovementDIMOND IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATIONMontclair Village Association: $14,700 · Community ImprovementMontclair Village AssociationLaurel District Association: $14,700 · Community ImprovementLaurel District AssociationLakeshore Avenue Business Improvement District: $10,000 · Community ImprovementLakeshore Avenue Business Improvement DistrictGRAND AVE MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION: $14,700 · OtherGRAND AVE MERCHAN…PIEDMONT AVENUE MERCHANTS ASSOCIATI ON: $13,000 · OtherPIEDMONT AVENUE M…Oakland Childrens Fairyland Inc: $10,000 · Recreation & Sports
Community Improvement$138,800Other$27,700Recreation & Sports$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetROCKRIDGE DISTRICT ASSOCIATION: $24,700 over 1y, 10% of budgetTEMESCAL TELEGRAPH AVENUE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION: $20,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetKOREA TOWN OAKLAND: $20,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetOakland Chinatown Improvement Council: $20,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetDIMOND IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION: $14,700 over 1y, 11% of budgetMontclair Village Association: $14,700 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetLaurel District Association: $14,700 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetOakland Childrens Fairyland Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetLakeshore Avenue Business Improvement District: $10,000 over 1y, 4.8% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Jack London Improvement District funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jack London Improvement District. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 2023, released 2023. 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 no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Jack London Improvement District’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