Skip to content
Lawrence Habitat for Humanity at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Lawrence Habitat for Humanity

The organization is a nondenominational christian nonprofit whose purpose is to create decent, affordable housing for those in need, and to make decent shelter a matter of conscience with people everywhere.

$162k
Granted FY2023
4
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$102k
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, FY2021 to 2023.

Housing & Shelter$388k
02FY2023 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $58k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $102k
$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$102,283
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HARVEY CO$20,000
MCPHERSON AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$20,000
MANHATTAN AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$18,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY21–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 74% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HARVEY CO: $20k → 9%HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF FRANKLIN CO: $16k → 10%MCPHERSON AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $20k → 10%MARSHALL COUNTY HABITAT FOR HUMANIT: $15k → 11%TOPEKA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $15k → 14%RIVERBEND HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $15k → 15%WICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $102k → 16%HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF ARK CITY: $15k → 16%EMPORIA AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $15k → 16%HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF CRAWFORD CT: $15k → 18%MANHATTAN AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $18k → 20%HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF KANSAS CITY: $15k → 15%HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HARVEY CTY: $15k → 9%MCPHERSON AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $15k → 10%TOPEKA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $7k → 14%WICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $27k → 16%WINFIELD AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $15k → 16%MANHATTAN AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $15k → 20%HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF KANSAS CITY: $12k → 15%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.

64%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$247k · 5 repeat orgs$141k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +42% since the first grant, against -7% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
8

Total granted

$247k
$121k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+42%
-7%

Still filing today

100%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time
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

  • MA
    MCPHERSON AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC
    2× · 2021–2023 · $35k · revenue +165%
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF THE NORTHERN FLINT HILLS INC
    2× · 2021–2023 · $33k · revenue +47%
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF KANSAS CITY
    2× · 2021–2022 · $27k · revenue +42%

Funded once

  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF FRANKLIN COUNTY
    one grant, 2022 · $16k · revenue 0% · 42% of their budget
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL EMPORIA AREA
    one grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue -11%
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HARVEY COUNTY INC
    one grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue +3%
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
Habitat for Humanity International Scotts Bluff County

Most construction work is performed by volunteers

—
2
Habitat for Humanity of Worcester County Inc

To build and rehabilitate houses which are sold to low-income families through no-interest loans

—
3
Habitat Community Housing Development Inc

Development of affordable housing

—
4
Habitat for Humanity International Inc

To put God's love into action, Habitat for Humanity brings people together to build homes, communities, and hope.

—
5
Habitat for Humanity Greater Wenatchee Area

Our mission is to provide decent and affordable housing to eligible families in partnership with god, the families and our community.

—
6
Habitat for Humanity of Grant County Inc

To create decent affordable housing for those in need and to make decent shelter a matter of conscience with people everywhere.

—
7
Habitat for Humanity International Wabash County Hfh

Wabash county habitat for humanity, inc. is a non-profit organization working in partnership with god and people everywhere, from all walks of life, to build decent, affordable housing.

—
8
Habitat for Humanity International

To provide affordbale housing to low income families along with zero interest mortgage

—
9
Habitat for Humanity International Inc

To eliminate poverty, housing and homelessness from the face of the earth by constructing and building adequate and basic housing.

—
10
Habitat for Humanity Pennyrile Region Inc

To provide affordable housing and financing to low income families.

Housing & Shelter
11
Habitat for Humanity of Peconic Inc

To sponsor specific construction of modest but adequate housing for working families unable to qualify for traditional mortgages.

—
12
Habitat for Humanity the Wind River Country

The organization builds homes for low income families.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mcpherson Area Habitat for Humanity Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Fuller Center. 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 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. 12 of the 14 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
5/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MCPHERSON AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $35,000 · OtherMCPHERSON AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INCHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF THE NORTHERN FLINT HILLS INC: $33,000 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF THE NORTHERN FLINT HILLS INCTOPEKA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $22,250 · OtherTOPEKA HABITAT FOR HUMANITYHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HARVEY CO: $20,000 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HARVEY COHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF FRANKLIN COUNTY: $16,200 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF FRANKLIN COUNTYHABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL EMPORIA AREA: $15,000 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL EMPORIA AREAHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HARVEY COUNTY INC: $15,000 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HARVEY COUNTY INCHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF ARKANSAS CITY: $15,000 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF ARKANSAS CITYWINFIELD AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $15,000 · OtherWINFIELD AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITYMARSHALL COUNTY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ASSOCIATION: $15,000 · OtherMARSHALL COUNTY HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ASSOCIATIONWICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $129,383 · Housing & ShelterWICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INCHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF KANSAS CITY: $27,100 · Housing & ShelterHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF KANSAS CITYTHE FULLER CENTER: $15,000 · Housing & ShelterTHE FULLER CENTERHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY KANSAS: $15,000 · Housing & ShelterHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY KANSAS
Other$201,450Housing & Shelter$186,483

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWICHITA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $129,383 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetMCPHERSON AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC: $35,000 over 2y, 7.2% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF THE NORTHERN FLINT HILLS INC: $33,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF KANSAS CITY: $27,100 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTOPEKA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $22,250 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF FRANKLIN COUNTY: $16,200 over 1y, 42% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY INTERNATIONAL EMPORIA AREA: $15,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF HARVEY COUNTY INC: $15,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF ARKANSAS CITY: $15,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetTHE FULLER CENTER: $15,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF CRAWFORD COUNTY KANSAS: $15,000 over 1y, 9.1% 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.

Habitat for Humanity …The Bank of America C…Amazonsmile Foundation
Habitat for Humanity International IncGA25.5× affinity10 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Habitat for Humanity International Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · 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 Lawrence Habitat for Humanity funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lawrence Habitat for Humanity. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%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 · 0–5%
    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 14 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 Lawrence Habitat for Humanity’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