Skip to content
New Economy Project Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

New Economy Project Inc

New economy project's mission is to work with community groups to build a just economy that works for all, by fostering cooperative and community-led development and challenging systems that fuel inequality and poverty.

$115k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$24k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Housing & Shelter$125kCivil Rights$34kPublic Benefit$32kCommunity Improvement$25k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $93,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $114,500 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $21,000 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $86k
$13,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NY COMMUNITIES FOR CHANGE$23,500
NY PUBLIC INT RESEARCH GROUP$15,000
COOPER SQUARE COMMITTEE$14,500
WOODSIDE ON THE MOVE INC$13,000
CARROLL GARDENS ASSOCIATION$10,000
NYC NETWORK OF WORKER COOPS$10,000
EAST NY COMMUNITY LAND TRUST$7,500
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 78% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%CHHAYA COMM DEVELOP CORP: $20k → 13%NY PUBLIC INT RESEARCH GROUP: $15k → 17%NY COMMUNITIES FOR CHANGE: $24k → 20%GREEN WORKER COOPERATIVES: $8k → 28%CHHAYA COMM DEVELOP CORP: $10k → 13%NYPIRG: $10k → 17%NY COMMUNITIES FOR CHANGE: $10k → 20%WOODSIDE ON THE MOVE INC: $13k → 13%NY PUBLIC INT RESEARCH GROUP: $7k → 17%CARROLL GARDENS ASSOCIATION: $10k → 20%NYC COMMUNITY LAND INITIATIVE: $20k → 17%EAST NY COMMUNITY LAND TRUST: $8k → 20%NYC COMMUNITY LAND INITIATIVE: $13k → 17%EAST NY COMMUNITY LAND TRUST: $7k → 20%NYC COMMUNITY LAND INITIATIVE: $10k → 17%COOPER SQUARE COMMITTEE: $15k → 17%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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$170k · 6 repeat orgs$45k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +84% since the first grant, against -93% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
1

Total granted

$170k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+84%
-93%

Still filing today

83%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $38k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’25
Community ImprovementHousing & ShelterCivil RightsCrime & LegalEnvironmentOther
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

  • NY
    New York Communities For Change Inc
    2× · 2020–2025 · $34k · revenue +42%
  • NY
    NEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP FUND INC
    3× · 2020–2025 · $32k · revenue +84%
  • CC
    CHHAYA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
    2× · 2020–2021 · $30k · revenue +270%

Funded once

  • GW
    GREEN WORKER INC
    one grant, 2020 · $8k · revenue -93%
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
New York Housing Conference Inc

NYHCs mission is to advance City, State and Federal policies and funding to support the development and preservation of decent and affordable housing for all New Yorkers. NYHC is a nonprofit affordable housing policy and advocacy…

Housing & Shelter
2
Community Development Project Inc

Takeroot justice provides legal, participatory research and policy support to strengthen the work of grassroots and community-based groups in new york city to dismantle racial, economic and social oppression.

Community Improvement
3
Inner City Green Team Economic and Enviromental Development

Our mission is to protect the environment and help transform the lives of residents living in New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) developments through recycling outreach/education, job training, and paid work that can lead to a…

Community Improvement
4
New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health Inc

The New York Committee for Occupational Safety and Health (NYCOSH) is a membership organization of workers, unions, community-based organizations, workers' rights activists, and health and safety professionals. NYCOSH uses training,…

—
5
New York Foundation
—
6
New York Congregational Community Services
Health
7
Caaav Voice Inc

CAAAV Voice is a grassroot organization aiming to empower Asian immigrant communities by organizing against gentrification, tenant rights and promote social justice.

—
8
Cnyc Inc (Council of New York Cooperatives & Condominiums)

Support housing cooperatives and condominiums

—
9
New York City Fair Trade Coalition

The NYC Fair Trade Coalition is a grassroots organization that promotes fair trade businesses and retailers in New York City and educates consumers on the importance of fair trade. It partners with ethically-aligned businesses, retailers,…

Education
10
Neighborhood Women of Williamsburg Greenpoint Inc
—
11
A Better Way Brooklyn Inc

A better way brooklyn, inc. is a new york not-for-profit corporation formed for the purposes of educating the public about transportation issues throughout new york city by promoting community awareness and concerns on construction and…

Public Benefit
12
Align the Alliance for a Greater New York Inc

programs in NYC pertaining to Workers Rights and workplaces by building power for working people

Employment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New York Communities for Change Inc; the most unlike its peers is Cooper Square Community Development Committee Inc. 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

9 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. 9 of the 10 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NYC COMMUNITY LAND INITIATIVE: $42,500 · OtherNYC COMMUNITY LAND INITIATIVENEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP FUND INC: $32,000 · OtherNEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP FUND I…WOODSIDE ON THE MOVE INC: $13,000 · OtherWOODSIDE ON THE MOVE INCNew York Communities For Change Inc: $33,500 · Civil RightsNew York Communit…NYC NOWC Inc: $17,000 · Community ImprovementNYC NOWC IncCooper Square Community Development Committee Inc: $14,500 · Community ImprovementCooper Square Co…CHHAYA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $30,000 · Crime & LegalCHHAYA COMMUNIT…EAST NEW YORK CLT INC: $14,500 · Housing & ShelterEAST NEW YOR…CARROLL GARDENS ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterCARROLL GARD…GREEN WORKER INC: $7,500 · Environment
Other$87,500Civil Rights$33,500Community Improvement$31,500Crime & Legal$30,000Housing & Shelter$24,500Environment$7,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNew York Communities For Change Inc: $33,500 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetNEW YORK PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP FUND INC: $32,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetCHHAYA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $30,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetNYC NOWC Inc: $17,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetEAST NEW YORK CLT INC: $14,500 over 2y, 7.4% of budgetWOODSIDE ON THE MOVE INC: $13,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCARROLL GARDENS ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetGREEN WORKER INC: $7,500 over 1y, 1.8% 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.

New York FoundationNorth Star Fund IncFidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
New York FoundationNY17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: New York Foundation · North Star Fund 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 New Economy Project Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from New Economy Project Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on New Economy Project’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