Skip to content
Neighborhood Impact Investment Fund Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Neighborhood Impact Investment Fund Inc

Neighborhood impact investment fund, inc.

$3.1M
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$3.0M
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, FY2023 to 2025.

Community Improvement$6.7MHousing & Shelter$224kHuman Services$18kYouth Development$9k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $91k
  • $250k+1 grant · $3.0M
$23,819
Median grant
1
States reached
$65M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MEDCO MADISON PARK NORTH LLC$3,002,660
DRUID HEIGHTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION INC$25,000
TAMIR EZZAT - 101 E TRENTON STREET LOAN$23,819
PHG - E 22ND STREET NOTE A LOAN$23,783
Individual grant recipient$17,992
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 (FY24–24, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%FAMILY RECOVERY PROGRAM INCORPORATED: $18k → 19%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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.8M · 3 repeat orgs$173k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +55% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
8

Total granted

$6.8M
$107k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%
0%

Still filing today

67%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $66k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
Community ImprovementHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • ME
    MARYLAND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
    2× · 2024–2025 · $6.5M · revenue +4%
  • TW
    TREND WALLBROOK JUNCTION INVESTORS LLC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $200k
  • DH
    Druid Heights Community Development Corporation
    2× · 2024–2025 · $49k · revenue +55%

Funded once

  • 11
    1101 1103 1105 HOLLINS AEQUO EVI LLC CO ERNST VALERY INVESTMENTS
    one grant, 2024 · $22k
  • TF
    THE FAMILY RECOVERY PROGRAM INC
    one grant, 2024 · $18k · revenue +10%
  • JH
    JAMES HOOPER LLC
    one grant, 2024 · $16k
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
3/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MARYLAND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $6,506,893 · OtherMARYLAND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION+8 more: $327,592 · OtherDruid Heights Community Development Corporation: $49,475 · Community ImprovementRobert Hunt Revitalization Center CDC Inc: $9,250 · Community ImprovementHCPI DEVELOPMENT FUND INC CENTRAL BALTIMORE FUTURE FUND: $7,998 · Community ImprovementTHE FAMILY RECOVERY PROGRAM INC: $18,498 · Human ServicesNEXT ONE UP FOUNDATION INC: $9,498 · Youth Development
Other$6,834,485Community Improvement$66,723Human Services$18,498Youth Development$9,498

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMARYLAND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $6,506,893 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetDruid Heights Community Development Corporation: $49,475 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetPEOPLES HOMESTEADING GROUP INC: $23,783 over 1y, 10% of budgetTHE FAMILY RECOVERY PROGRAM INC: $18,498 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetNEXT ONE UP FOUNDATION INC: $9,498 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetRobert Hunt Revitalization Center CDC Inc: $9,250 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetHCPI DEVELOPMENT FUND INC CENTRAL BALTIMORE FUTURE FUND: $7,998 over 1y, 0.6% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Neighborhood Impact Investment Fund Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Neighborhood Impact Investment Fund Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Druid Heights Community Development Corporation: 100% of income from government
  • The Family Recovery Program Inc: 22% of income from government
  • Maryland Economic Development Corporation: 0% of 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)
1rely 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.

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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Neighborhood Impact Investment’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