· Public charity
Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles
Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles (LAFLA) seeks to achieve equal justice for low-income people.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $65k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $198k
- $250k+10 grants · $26M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Housing Rights Center | $5,684,447 |
| Inner City Law Center | $4,435,587 |
| Liberty Hill Foundation | $4,188,507 |
| Basta Universal | $3,046,286 |
| Neighborhood Legal Services | $2,883,612 |
| Eviction Defense Network | $2,786,269 |
| Bet Tzedek | $1,324,739 |
| Community Legal Aid SoCal | $1,194,392 |
| Public Counsel | $483,735 |
| Mental Health Advocacy Services | $271,129 |
| California Center for Movement Legal Services | $99,223 |
| Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California | $98,577 |
| Los Angeles Community Action Network | $32,500 |
| Strategic Actions for a Just Economy | $32,500 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY21–22, $126k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +21% since the first grant, against +17% for the ones you funded once.
14 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $99k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- ICInner City Law Center4× · 2021–2024 · $8.8M · revenue +27%
- BIBASTA INC4× · 2021–2024 · $7.3M · revenue +19%
- NLNeighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County4× · 2021–2024 · $5.7M · revenue +30%
Funded once
- CSChrysalis Shelter for Victims of Domestic Violence Incone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue -19%
- WOWOMENSHELTER OF LONG BEACHone grant, 2022 · $15k · revenue -33%
- TCTHAI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTERgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $14k · revenue +109%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
CFJ promotes access to justice for underserved communities seeking to assert their legal rights. Our pro bono-based projects bridge the gap for underserved communities seeking safety, stability, and justice. CFJ engages volunteer attorneys…
The legal aid justice center partners with communities and clients to achieve justice by dismantling systems that create and perpetuate poverty.
As one of the most enduring civil rights institutions on the West Coast, we work to dismantle systems of oppression and racism, and build an equitable and just society.
The survivor justice center secures justice for survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault and empowers them to create their own future.
To provide transformative legal services that enable diverse communities in east palo alto and beyond to achieve a secure and thriving future.
La Raza Centro Legal San Francisco provides high quality, highly trusted, free legal services to low-income or immigrant clients in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Legal Link removes legal barriers that prolong poverty by adding critically needed capacity to the legal ecosystem.
HAC assists homeless and mentally ill clients in the long and difficult process of becoming eligible for SSI and MediCal benefits. HAC provides assistance with other public benefits that clients need in the interim to survive until their…
Community Legal Services was established to ensure the best interests of the public are represented by participating and intervening before the California Public Utilities Commission, and all other municipal, state, or federal regulatory…
Centro Legal De La Raza is a comprehensive legal services agency protecting and advancing the rights of low-income immigrant communities throguh culturally competent bilingual legal representation, education, and advocacy.
The Asian Law Caucus's mission is to promote, advance, and represent the legal and civil rights of Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities, recognizing that social, economic, political and racial inequalities continue to exist…
FVLC helps diverse communities in Alameda County heal from domestic violence and sexual assault, advocating for justice and healthy relationships. We provide survivor-centered legal and crisis intervention services, offer prevention for…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cangress Dba Los Angeles Community Action Network and the most unlike its peers is Mental Health Advocacy Services Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 42 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 14% of your grantees by number, and just 34% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 5% lost their exemption, against 16% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
22 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 Southern California Housing Rights Center ↗
- Who funds LIBERTY HILL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Inner City Law Center ↗
- Who funds BASTA INC ↗
- Who funds Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County ↗
- Who funds EVICTION DEFENSE NETWORK ↗
- Who funds BET TZEDEK ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY LEGAL AID SOCAL ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC COUNSEL ↗
- Who funds MENTAL HEALTH ADVOCACY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds SAJE ↗
- Who funds ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds California Center for Movement Legal Services ↗
- Who funds CANGRESS DBA LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds THE PEOPLE CONCERN ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR THE PACIFIC-ASIAN FAMILY INC ↗
- Who funds Chrysalis Shelter for Victims of Domestic Violence Inc ↗
- Who funds WOMENSHELTER OF LONG BEACH ↗
- Who funds THAI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
- Who funds CHRYSALIS CENTER ↗
- Who funds LTSC COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds KOREAN AMERICAN FAMILY SERVICES INC ↗
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.
Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · The Ahmanson Foundation · Weingart Foundation · The Annenberg Foundation · Liberty Hill Foundation · The California Wellness Foundation · The California Endowment · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Sempra Foundation · Munger Tolles & Olson Foundation · Durfee 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 Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles 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.
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.