· Public charity
National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty
Fearlessly advance federal, state and local policies to prevent and end homelessness while fiercely defending the rights of all unhoused persons.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 8 grants below total $242,708 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $250,437 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $7,729 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $16k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $90k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $137k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION FUND FOR JUSTICE AND EDUCATION | $81,708 |
| INVISIBLE PEOPLE | $55,000 |
| POVERTY & RACE RESEARCH ACTION COUNCIL | $37,500 |
| VOICES OF COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS & LEADERS (VOCAL-NY) INC | $20,000 |
| NATIONAL COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS | $20,000 |
| DRVR CONSULTING LLC | $12,500 |
| NATIONAL INDIGENOUS WOMEN'S RESOURCE CENTER | $8,000 |
| TRUE COLORS UNITED | $8,000 |
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 (FY23–24, $113k) 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 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 +47% since the first grant, against +30% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 5 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, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $94k 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
- ABAmerican Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education2× · 2023–2024 · $181k · revenue -18%
INVISIBLE PEOPLE2× · 2023–2024 · $105k · revenue +47%- DCDRVR CONSULTING LLC2× · 2023–2024 · $25k
Funded once
- LALEGAL AID SOCIETY OF EASTERN VIRGINIAgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +30%
- CHCONGRESSIONAL HUNGER CENTER INCone grant, 2020 · $6k · revenue +16%
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.
The legal aid justice center partners with communities and clients to achieve justice by dismantling systems that create and perpetuate poverty.
The National Immigrant Justice Center (NIJC) is a leader in advancing immigrant rights through its unique strategy drawing on its legal services to promote legal reform through litigation, advocacy and strategic communications.
The Organization is a national housing and legal advocacy center. Its mission is to advance housing justice for poor people by: increasing and preserving the supply of decent, affordable housing; improving existing housing conditions,…
Work with DC courts, private bar & legal services providers to increase legal representations for low & moderate income DC residents, enhance efficiency of legal services, and reduce barriers to the judicial system.
In 2024, Inner City Law Center, ICLC, served over 3,400 people, helping vulnerable Angelenos to remain in their homes and recover nearly $20.5 million in financial benefits.
The National Legal Advocacy Network d/b/a Grassroots Law & Organizing for Workers is a legal non-profit organization dedicated to using legal strategies as a tool to build power for marginalized workers and create systemic change through…
Fearlessly advance federal, state and local policies to prevent and end homelessness while fiercely defending the rights of all unhoused persons.
The Equal Justice Center is a non-profit law firm and employment justice organization which empowers low-income families, workers, and communities to achieve fair treatment in the workplace, in the justice system, and in our shared society…
Chicago Coalition to End Homelessness (CCH) builds community power and advances racial equity through organizing, advocacy, legal assistance, and education to prevent and end homelessness because housing is a human right.
The Equal Justice Society (EJS) is transforming the nations consciousness on racethrough law, social science, and the arts. EJS works to dismantle structural andinstitutional racism to advance robust equal protection under the Fourteenth…
To help tenants stand up for their legal rights.
Public interest legal activities
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Voices of Community Activists & Leaders (Vocal-Ny) Inc and the most unlike its peers is American Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 10 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
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 American Bar Association Fund for Justice and Education ↗
- Who funds INVISIBLE PEOPLE ↗
- Who funds LEGAL AID SOCIETY OF EASTERN VIRGINIA ↗
- Who funds Poverty and Race Research Action Council ↗
- Who funds National Coalition for the Homeless ↗
- Who funds VOICES OF COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS & LEADERS (VOCAL-NY) INC ↗
- Who funds TRUE COLORS UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL INDIGENOUS WOMENS RESOURCE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CONGRESSIONAL HUNGER CENTER 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: Conrad N Hilton Foundation · The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile 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 National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty 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.