Skip to content
La Family Housing Corporation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

La Family Housing Corporation

L.a.

$3.8M
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$895k
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.

Housing & Shelter$11MHealth$1.1MCommunity Improvement$100k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $1,891,129, the rows itemized in this filing. The $3,758,916 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,867,787 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.
$626,847
Median grant
1
States reached
$160M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LAFHBUILDS INC$895,034
HARMONY VILLA INC$626,847
LAFH PERMANENT HOUSING CORP$369,248
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 (FY17–21, $6.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%HOPE OF THE VALLEY: $1.7M → 14%HOPE OF THE VALLEY: $1.0M → 14%HOPE OF THE VALLEY: $395k → 14%HOPE OF THE VALLEY: $108k → 14%HOPE OF THE VALLEY: $79k → 14%CHILDRENS HOMES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $1.4M → 14%CHILDRENS HOMES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $1.2M → 14%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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$10M · 12 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +180% since the first grant, against +28% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
2

Total granted

$10M
$128k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+180%
+28%

Still filing today

92%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.9M went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’24
Housing & ShelterCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesHealthOther
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

  • HT
    HOPE THE MISSION
    7× · 2017–2023 · $3.3M · revenue ×16
  • BT
    BRIDGE TO HOME SCV
    7× · 2017–2023 · $1.3M · revenue +435% · 29% of their budget
  • NORTHEAST VALLEY HEALTH CORPORATION
    6× · 2017–2023 · $1.1M · revenue +89%

Funded once

  • CF
    COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE COMMUNITY DEVEL
    one grant, 2021 · $100k
  • SF
    San Fernando Valley Community Mental Health Center Incgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $28k · revenue +28%
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
Union Station Homeless Services

We work to end homelessness through housing solutions, supportive services, and connection to community. we advocate for equitable and just systems that ensure all individuals and families will have a safe place they can call home.

Human Services
2
The Center in Hollywood

The center provides a place of community to end isolation, build relationships, and introduce housing, health and wellness services to adult individuals experiencing homelessness in hollywood. it contracts with public and non-profit grant…

Human Services
3
Inland Temporary Homes

Aims to reduce countywide homelessness while addressing each family's personal struggle with perpetuating homelessness and poverty in their children. Provides both transitional shelter and rapid re-housing options in addition to…

—
4
Interval House

The mission of the organization is to ensure safety and stability for people who are battered, abused, homeless or at risk; to create public awareness about the epidemic of violence; and to mobilize the community to prevent violence and…

Human Services
5
Oxnard Homeless Prevntion
Human Services
6
Little House

Individual drug and alcohol rehabilitation services

Health
7
Didi Hirsch Psychiatric Service

The roots of the los angeles didi hirsch psychiatric service dba didi hirsch mental health services ("dhmhs") extend back to the 1930s, when a group of women funded psychiatric care for people whose lives were devastated by the depression.…

Health
8
The San Francisco Particular Council of the Society of St Vincent De Paul

The mission of the st. vincent de paul society of san francisco (svdp-sf) is to offer hope and service on a direct person-to-person basis, working to break the cycles of homelessness and domestic violence.

Human Services
9
Los Angeles Centers for Alcohol and Drug Abuse

Our Vision is to enhance the educational and economic well-being of the people we serve by means of direct human services, advocacy, and referrals.Our Mission is to save lives, unite families, and protect the community through addiction…

—
10
Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Santa Rosa

Catholic charities creates access to opportunities for self-sufficiency by providing innovative and compassionate services to people of all backgrounds, beliefs, and cultures.

Human Services
11
Housing Works

Our mission is to create housing and service options that model, with respect and dignity, sustainable, environmentally sensitive, affordable communities for people of limited resources.

Housing & Shelter
12
Downtown Women's Center

Housing, employment, and physical and mental health services for women overcoming homelessness and poverty.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Home Again Los Angeles; the most unlike its peers is Bettertogether Forever. 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

18 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
13/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HOPE THE MISSION: $3,311,550 · Human ServicesHOPE THE MISSIONCHILDRENS HOMES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $2,668,880 · Human ServicesCHILDRENS HOMES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIABRIDGE TO HOME SCV: $1,293,997 · Community ImprovementBRIDGE TO HOME SCVHARMONY VILLA INC: $626,847 · Community ImprovementHARMONY VILLA INCANTELOPE VALLEY PARTNERS FOR HEALTH: $142,524 · Community ImprovementANTELOPE VALLEY PAR…LAFHBUILDS INC: $895,034 · Housing & ShelterLAFHBUILDS INCNEW ECONOMICS FOR WOMEN: $431,540 · Housing & ShelterNEW ECONOMICS FOR …LAFH PERMANENT HOUSING CORP: $369,248 · Housing & ShelterLAFH PERMANENT HOU…ASCENCIA: $240,593 · Housing & ShelterASCENCIAHOME AGAIN LOS ANGELES: $103,362 · Housing & ShelterNORTHEAST VALLEY HEALTH CORPORATION: $1,103,555 · HealthNORTHEAST VALL…TARZANA TREATMENT CENTERS INC: $468,006 · HealthTARZANA TREATM…ASCENSIA: $209,840 · OtherCHRYSALIS CENTER: $127,625 · OtherCOALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE COMMUNITY DEVEL: $100,000 · OtherNEW DIRECTIONS INC: $63,534 · OtherSan Fernando Valley Community Mental Health Center Inc: $28,172 · Other
Human Services$5,980,430Community Improvement$2,063,368Housing & Shelter$2,039,777Health$1,571,561Other$529,171

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 budgetHOPE THE MISSION: $3,311,550 over 7y, 6.7% of budgetCHILDRENS HOMES OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $2,668,880 over 4y, 66% of budgetBRIDGE TO HOME SCV: $1,293,997 over 7y, 29% of budgetNORTHEAST VALLEY HEALTH CORPORATION: $1,103,555 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetLAFHBUILDS INC: $895,034 over 1y, 20% of budgetHARMONY VILLA INC: $626,847 over 1y, 76% of budgetTARZANA TREATMENT CENTERS INC: $468,006 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetNEW ECONOMICS FOR WOMEN: $431,540 over 3y, 3.1% of budgetLAFH PERMANENT HOUSING CORP: $369,248 over 1y, 89% of budgetASCENCIA: $240,593 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetANTELOPE VALLEY PARTNERS FOR HEALTH: $142,524 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetCHRYSALIS CENTER: $127,625 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetHOME AGAIN LOS ANGELES: $103,362 over 2y, 8.1% of budgetNEW DIRECTIONS INC: $63,534 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetSan Fernando Valley Community Mental Health Center Inc: $28,172 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.

California Community …Shelter Partnership I…Kaiser Foundation Hos…United Way IncThe Ahmanson Foundati…The Ralph M Parsons F…Weingart FoundationProvidence Health Sys…The Rose Hills Founda…Baby2babyThe Annenberg Foundat…Sempra Foundation
California Community FoundationCA22.8× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · Shelter Partnership Inc · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · United Way Inc · The Ahmanson Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · Weingart Foundation · Providence Health System - So California · The Rose Hills Foundation · Baby2baby · The Annenberg Foundation · Sempra 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 La Family Housing Corporation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from La Family Housing Corporation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s 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 · 0–90%
    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 17 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.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on La Family Housing’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