Skip to content
Neighbors for a Better San Francisco Advocacy at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Neighbors for a Better San Francisco Advocacy

To promote the common good and social welfare of the people of San Francisco by educating the public and advocating on important issues of public policy that will improve the quality of life and governance in San Francisco.

$2.4M
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$950k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Public Safety & Disaster$5.3MPublic Benefit$4.1MCommunity Improvement$760kCivil Rights$112kEducation$90kHousing & Shelter$85kEnvironment$75kCrime & Legal$15k
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $2,276,229, the rows itemized in this filing. The $2,447,729 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $171,500 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 $10k1 grant · $9k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $160k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $214k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.9M
$48,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$382k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Committee to Fix SF Govt$950,000
Neighbors for SF Non Rep Acct$593,729
Connected SF$350,000
Great Highway for All$89,000
Yes on Prop E for a Safer SF$75,000
SF Parent Action$50,000
Support First Responders Now$48,000
Chinese American Dem ClubPAC$45,000
Yes on C Housing & Downtown$25,000
No on B Stop the Cop Tax$17,500
SF for Responsible Spending$14,000
Revitalize San Francisco$10,000
SF Apt Association PAC$9,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY21–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Ed Lee Democratic Club PAC: $210k → 8%Great Highway for All: $89k → 10%San Fran for Public Safety: $3.1M → 10%United Demo Club: $106k → 8%Yes on Prop E for a Safer SF: $75k → 10%San Fran for Public Safety: $1.5M → 10%Ed Lee Democratic Club PAC: $100k → 8%Coalition to Grow SF: $65k → 10%Connected SF: $475k → 10%Protect Our Right No on C: $30k → 8%SF Parent Action: $50k → 10%Connected SF: $450k → 10%Ed Lee Democratic Club PAC: $20k → 8%Support First Responders Now: $48k → 10%Concerned Parents Supporting: $370k → 10%Committee to Fix SF Govt: $950k → 8%Yes on C Housing & Downtown: $25k → 10%Connected SF: $350k → 10%Neighbors for SF Non Rep Acct: $700k → 8%SF Parent Action: $10k → 10%Connected SF: $85k → 10%Neighbors for SF Non Rep Acct: $594k → 8%Revitalize San Francisco: $10k → 10%San Fran Common Sense Voter: $55k → 10%SF for Responsible Spending: $14k → 8%Bring Algebra Back: $10k → 10%Protect our Right No on H: $45k → 10%Mid-Market Neighbors: $43k → 10%Stop All Asian Hate: $25k → 10%No on B Stop the Cop Tax: $18k → 10%Stop Crime Action: $650k → 10%Stop Crime Action: $15k → 10%Business Coal for SF Pub Sch: $50k → 10%SF Apt Association PAC: $9k → 10%SF East Neighborhds Demo Cl: $8k → 10%Camp for Better SF Public Sc: $70k → 10%Chinese American Dem ClubPAC: $45k → 10%Recall School Board Members: $20k → 10%SF Guardians No on C: $15k → 10%Chinese American Dem ClubPAC: $12k → 10%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.

80%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.4M · 7 repeat orgs$2.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +74% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
14

Total granted

$8.4M
$912k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+74%
0%

Still filing today

57%
21%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 46% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.2M went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
Public BenefitCrime & LegalCommunity ImprovementEducationCivil RightsOther
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

  • SF
    San Fran for Public Safety
    2× · 2021–2022 · $4.6M
  • CS
    Connected SF
    4× · 2021–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +6% · 98% of their budget
  • NF
    Neighbors for a Better San Francisco Advocacy
    2× · 2023–2024 · $1.3M · revenue -28%

Funded once

  • CP
    Concerned Parents Supporting the Recall of Collins Lopez and Moliga
    one grant, 2022 · $370k
  • UD
    United Demo Club
    one grant, 2022 · $106k
  • CF
    Campaign for Better San Francisco Public Schools
    one grant, 2021 · $70k · 26% of their budget
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
Sf Forward

To oppose and support local ballot measures in San Francisco.

—
2
Yes on Prop E for a Safer Sf Mayor Breeds Ballot Measure Committee

The mission of the committee is to run a campaign in support of San Francisco Proposition E Safer San Francisco 2024 on the ballot for March 5, 2024. The measure will remove obstacles that have been put in place that prevent San Francisco…

—
3
Sf for Muni Accountability and Reliable Service - No on Prop L

To oppose ballot measure Additional Business Tax on Transportation Network Companies and Autonomous Vehicle Businesses to Fund Public Transportation in San Francisco, CA.

—
4
Abundant San Francisco

To support effective government policies in San Francisco

—
5
Committee for Safer Streets and Reliable Accessible Transportation

Support the passage of local transportation bond initiative in San Francisco.

—
6
Affordable Homes for San Franciscans Now

Support passage of local ballot measure in San Francisco, CA to support affordable and middle income housing.

—
7
Affordable Housing for Sf

The committee planned and executed a marketing campaign in San Francisco to promote the passage of City Ballot Measure A on the March 2024 San Francisco ballot. The measure passed with 70.4% of the vote. Prop A will help create 1,500 units…

—
8
Yes on F for Treatment Accountability Mayor Breeds Ballot Measure Committee

Yes on F for Treatment + Accountability - Mayor Breed's Ballot Measure Committee in support of Illegal Substance Dependence Screening and Treatment for Recipients of City Public Assistance in San Francisco, CA.

—
9
San Francisco Association of Realtors Foundation
Philanthropy
10
San Franciscans for Fire Earthquake and Disaster Preparedness Sponsored by the San Francisco Firefighters Local 798

Educate voters on the passage of Measure B a bond for Fire Earthquake and Disaster Preparedness on the ballot for City and County of San Francisco in the 2020 Primary Election.

—
11
San Francisco Health and Recovery Bond Dba Yes on a

Support passage of local San Francisco, CA ballot measure for health and homelessness, parks, and streets bond.

—
12
Neighbors for a Better San Francisco

The organization's charitable and educational purposes include, but are not limited to: the development of, and education of the public with respect to, public policy issues that will improve the quality of live and governance in San…

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Committee to Fix San Francisco Government Yes on D No on E; the most unlike its peers is Concerned Parents Supporting the Recall of Collins Lopez and Moliga. 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

17 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. 17 of the 30 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.

6
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/17
Grantees still filing
4/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

San Fran for Public Safety: $4,616,000 · OtherSan Fran for Public SafetyCommittee to Fix San Francisco Government Yes on D No on E: $950,000 · OtherCommittee to Fix San Francisco Government Yes on D No on EConcerned Parents Supporting the Recall of Collins Lopez and Moliga: $370,000 · OtherEd Lee Democratic Club PAC: $330,200 · Other+21 more: $821,018 · Other+21 moreConnected SF: $1,360,000 · Public BenefitConnected SFNeighbors for a Better San Francisco Advocacy: $1,293,729 · Community ImprovementNeighbors for…STOP CRIME ACTION: $665,000 · Crime & LegalCoalition to Grow San Francisco - Grow SF: $65,000 · Civil RightsSan Francisco Parent Action: $60,000 · Education
Other$7,087,218Public Benefit$1,360,000Community Improvement$1,293,729Crime & Legal$665,000Civil Rights$65,000Education$60,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetConnected SF: $1,360,000 over 4y, 98% of budgetNeighbors for a Better San Francisco Advocacy: $1,293,729 over 2y, 15% of budgetCommittee to Fix San Francisco Government Yes on D No on E: $950,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetSTOP CRIME ACTION: $665,000 over 2y, 52% of budgetCampaign for Better San Francisco Public Schools: $70,000 over 1y, 26% of budgetCoalition to Grow San Francisco - Grow SF: $65,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetSan Francisco Parent Action: $60,000 over 2y, 77% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $50,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetSupport our First Responders Now Yes on N: $48,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetProtect Our Right to Vote: $45,000 over 1y, 36% of budgetProtect Our Right to Hold Politicians Acctble No on C: $30,000 over 1y, 44% of budgetYes on C For More Housing & Revitalized Downtown: $25,000 over 1y, 5.2% of budgetSan Franciscans for a Fully Staffed Police Department: $17,500 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetSan Franciscans for Responsible Spending No on Prop B: $14,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetRevitalize San Francisco: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSan Francisco Apartment Association: $9,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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 Neighbors for a Better San Francisco Advocacy funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Neighbors for a Better San Francisco Advocacy. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 Neighbors for a Better San Francisco Advocacy?

    Find your warmest path to Neighbors for a Better San Francisco Advocacy 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 30 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 Neighbors for a Better San Francisco Advocacy’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