Skip to content

· Public charity

Nazarene Compassionate Ministries Inc

To respond to and prevent human suffering resulting from poverty and disaster.

$1.0M
Granted FY2024still arriving
3
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$29k
Largest
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.

Human Services$356kFood & Nutrition$154kYouth Development$152kEducation$92kReligion$20kScience & Tech$6k
02FY2024 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $37,005, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,030,331 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $993,326 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.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $8k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $29k
$5,844
Median grant
3
States reached
$805k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FAWN GROVE COMPASSION CENTER$29,054
CALIFORNIA MOBILITY CENTER SACRAMENTO$5,844
CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE INC$2,107
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 (FY17–22, $146k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 51% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%OROVILLE HOPE CENTER: $8k → 18%SHEPHERD COMMUNITY CENTER: $60k → 16%XZONE: $71k → 7%OROVILLE HOPE CENTER: $7k → 18%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.

Which US states its grants reach

IN
OH
CA
MO
VA
MD
KS
TN

Grants abroad, by region: $704k on the FY2024 return

Schedule F, as filed: 4 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Russia and Neighboring States$536k · 76% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: HUMANITARIAN AID

South Asia$100k · 14% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: HUMANITARIAN AID

Sub-Saharan Africa$58k · 8% · 3 grants

Stated purpose: HUMANITARIAN AID

North America (Canada and Mexico)$10k · 1% · 1 grant

Stated purpose: HUMANITARIAN AID

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

47%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$296k · 3 repeat orgs$330k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
5

Total granted

$296k
$324k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-55%
+119%

Still filing today

33%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesEducationOther
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

  • CO
    CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE INC
    7× · 2018–2024 · $177k
  • FG
    FAWN GROVE COMPASSION CENTER
    3× · 2022–2024 · $104k
  • OH
    Oroville Hope Center
    2× · 2021–2022 · $15k · revenue -55%

Funded once

  • CI
    CROSSBRIDGE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $92k · revenue +249%
  • PB
    PF Bresee Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $81k · revenue +60%
  • XC
    XZONE COMMUNITY CENTERS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $71k · revenue +27%
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
The Hope Center Inc

The Hope Center is a faith-based organization designed to assist low income individuals and families who live in Bakersfield, California to move towards wholeness, physically, emotionally and spiritually by distributing food, clothing and…

Human Services
2
House of Hope Midwest

The House of Hope is dedicated to serving individuals, families, and our community by providing a hand up into a hope-filled future.

Human Services
3
Hope Center Inc

The Hope Center seeks out and teams with volunteers from congregations of many faiths.The Center is committed to serving people in need in Waukesha County, Wisconsin through financial assistance, food, child care, clothing and…

—
4
Bridge of Hope Ministries

Transforming lives in the Ville through access to supportive services and efficacy.

Religion
5
His Hope Teen Challenge

His Hope Teen Challenge offers hope to individuals struggling with addiction through support groups, outreach programs, missional recovery homes, and a referral program.

Human Services
6
Grace Horizon Inc

To support survivors of violence and exploitation through coaching, counseling, and mentorship.

Human Services
7
Family Promise - Salt Lake

We help families experiencing homelessness find lasting independence and security.

Housing & Shelter
8
Coalition of Care Greater Cincinnati

Coalition of Care of Greater Cincinnati exists to mobilize churches and to inspire volunteers to care for vulnerable children and fragile families.

Youth Development
9
Hope-Net

The Organizaton was formed to address the hunger and homeless needs of poverty stricken families of the community through the distribution of food, clothing and shelter. Additionally, it develops, owns and operates a 17 unit apartment…

Food & Nutrition
10
Ministry Center

We build bridges between people experiencing the immediate effects of poverty and homelessness to the physical and spiritual resources available to alleviate suffering and facilitate long term transformation.

Human Services
11
Community of Hope Incorporated

To provide support, education, and rehabilitation services to qualified homeless citizens to give them the opportunity to re-enter society as contributing members.

Crime & Legal
12
Tessie Cleveland Community Services Corporation

To provide dignified, comprehensive behavioral health services, transforming lives and strengthening communities.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Convoy of Hope; the most unlike its peers is The Lotridge Family Foundation. 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

11 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHURCH OF THE NAZARENE INC: $177,029 · OtherCHURCH OF THE NAZARENE INCFAWN GROVE COMPASSION CENTER: $104,145 · OtherFAWN GROVE COMPASSION CENTERPF Bresee Foundation: $81,123 · OtherPF Bresee FoundationLOWER LIGHT MINISTRIES INC: $20,067 · Other+1 more: $5,844 · OtherCONVOY OF HOPE: $154,224 · InternationalCONVOY OF HOPEXZONE COMMUNITY CENTERS INC: $70,802 · Human ServicesXZONE COMMUNITY CENTE…Shepherd Community Inc: $60,414 · Human ServicesShepherd Community In…Oroville Hope Center: $14,720 · Human ServicesOroville Hope CenterCROSSBRIDGE INC: $92,030 · EducationCROSSBRIDGE I…
Other$388,208International$154,224Human Services$145,936Education$92,030

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCROSSBRIDGE INC: $92,030 over 1y, 13% of budgetPF Bresee Foundation: $81,123 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetShepherd Community Inc: $60,414 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetLOWER LIGHT MINISTRIES INC: $20,067 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetOroville Hope Center: $14,720 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetCalifornia Mobility Center: $5,844 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA6.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Nazarene Compassionate Ministries Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Nazarene Compassionate Ministries Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%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
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Nazarene Compassionate Ministries Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Nazarene Compassionate Ministries Inc through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 10 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 Nazarene Compassionate Ministries’ filings →

    More from the funding graph