· Public charity
Ndc Housing & Economic Development Corporation - Group Return
Ndc housing and economic development corporation was organized for the following charitable purposes:a.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 99% of NDC HOUSING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION - GROUP RETURN’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $47k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $64k
- $250k+2 grants · $2.7M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SEATTLE BCOF LLC | $1,458,010 |
| NDC HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORP | $1,250,000 |
| NDC COMMUNITY IMPACT LOAN FUND | $64,276 |
| THE COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND I LLC | $27,485 |
| KINGS THEATRE MASTER TENANT LLC | $20,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 58% of your 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.
4 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 0 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, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.5M 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
- NHNDC HOUSING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION8× · 2017–2024 · $9.0M · revenue +44%
- NHNDC HOUSING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION4× · 2021–2024 · $368k
- TCTHE COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FUND I LLC2× · 2023–2024 · $80k
Funded once
- 2S2816 S MCCLELLAN STREET LLCone grant, 2023 · $783k
- BOBHE OF WEST SEATTLE LLCone grant, 2020 · $163k
- FMFOGON MAC INCone grant, 2020 · $100k
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.
To offer outdoor-oriented youth organizations a secure, affordable space to meet, allowing their programs to thrive and grow in the local community.
The Organization is a competitive alpine sports club, fostering the development of alpine athletes of every age, with each athlete representing the highest level of sportsmanship, teamwork, leadership, and personal responsibility.
Northwest United is a premier youth soccer club serving Skagit County and surrounding areas. As one of the top clubs in the Pacific Northwest, we have grown to 41 teams across boys and girls' divisions, offering year-round development for…
The Renton Rowing Center is a Rowing based recreational sport center. It is an inclusive and diverse community that encourages people of all ages, abilities and backgrounds to discover community on and off the water.
To provide opportunities for all youths under the age of 19 develop character and play affiliated soccer at a level commensurate with their ability and interest.
Issaquah FC is focused on providing a fun and safe soccer environment for boys and girls, ages 5 through 18, to play the game and develop soccer skills. Issaquah FC operates in the geographic footprint of the Issaquah School District, and…
To be a self sustaining club, inclusive of all people and skill levels that promotes curling development in an enjoyable environment.
The purpose of the Olympia Area Rowing Association is to promote, foster, and facilitate the sports of rowing and paddling human-powered watercraft; to preserve the heritage and history of these sports; and to organize and operate a…
The Everett Rowing Association offers the premier rowing experience for adults and youth in the greater Everett area. The association combines recreation, social, and competitive opportunities that lead to building health, life skills, and…
YAHA offers all ages and all skill levels the opportunity to skate twice per week.
Our Mission is to promote health, engage in cultural activities, and encourage recreational activities for adults and children
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ymca of the Greater Tri-Cities and the most unlike its peers is Richland Youth Football Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.2% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
52 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. 52 of the 2,000 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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.
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: Greater Vancouver Chamber of Commerce · Columbia River Economic Development Council · Oneredmond · Innovia Foundation · Economic Alliance Snohomish County · Thurston County Economic Development Cou · Fourth Plain Forward · Alliance 2005 · Workforce Development Council Snohomish County · Economic Development Council of Mason County · Greater Seattle Chamber of Commerce · Thurston Economic Development Council Center for Business Innovation
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 Ndc Housing & Economic Development Corporation - Group Return 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.