· Public charity
Redeemer City To City
Redeemer City to City (RCTC) exists to multiply churches and Christian leaders committed to a shared vision for gospel movements in the great cities of the world.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 50 grants below total $3,332,804 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $7,222,930 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $3,890,126 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k5 grants · $33k
- $10k–50k36 grants · $832k
- $50k–250k6 grants · $792k
- $250k+3 grants · $1.7M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Keller Content Development | $650,000 |
| Redeemer East Side | $613,825 |
| City to City Miami | $413,271 |
| Influential Global Ministries | $219,000 |
| Surge Network | $187,531 |
| The Chicago Partnership | $180,000 |
| Crossbridge Church | $94,973 |
| TogetherLA | $60,000 |
| Stratum | $50,000 |
| Joy Christian Fellowship | $40,000 |
| Liberty Church Washington Heights | $40,000 |
| Centro Christiano Familia De Fe Inc | $40,000 |
| Acts Church | $40,000 |
| Reunion Church | $40,000 |
| Park Slope Christian Tabernacle | $35,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY18–23, $37k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those 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.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $3.7M on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 6 regions, $3.7M to organizations and $49k to individuals. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: Church Planting Development
Stated purpose: Church Planting Development
Stated purpose: Church Planting Development · Church Planting Assistance
Stated purpose: Church Planting Development
Stated purpose: Church Planting Development
Stated purpose: Church Planting Development
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. 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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +27% since the first grant, against +14% for the ones you funded once.
100 repeat relationships — 37 still active in FY2024, 63 since wound down; 13 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, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $870k 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
- CPCHICAGO PARTNERSHIP FOR CHURCH PLANTING3× · 2022–2024 · $625k · revenue +75% · 71% of their budget
- CTCITY TO CITY SOCAL7× · 2017–2024 · $524k · revenue ×12 · 65% of their budget
- RTREFORMED THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY5× · 2017–2024 · $417k · revenue +54%
Funded once
- HEHOPE EAST VILLAGE COVENANT CHURCHone grant, 2021 · $60k
- NYNew York Dream Center Foursquare Churchone grant, 2020 · $45k
- OCONE COMMUNITY CHURCHone grant, 2023 · $45k
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.
Church
To help community build better surrounding for worship
Global City Mission Initiative is dedicated to cross-cultural evanglism, disciplemaking, church planting among diverse diaspora populations in strategic cities reaching out evangelistically to start multiply churches, training believers to…
Religous Organization
To Train Christian Leaders and Plant Churches in China
Equip churches and pastors with theological training.
Training pastors in third world countries
To promote the Gospel of Jesus Christ and establish churches in European countries
NY City Serve celebrates and accelerates collaborations that love and serve the city.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Christian Community Association of South Florida Inc and the most unlike its peers is Europe City Partners. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 26 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 11% of your grantees by number, and just 14% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
22 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. 22 of the 164 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
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.
- Who funds KELLER CONTENT DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds CHICAGO PARTNERSHIP FOR CHURCH PLANTING ↗
- Who funds CITY TO CITY SOCAL ↗
- Who funds REFORMED THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ↗
- Who funds STRATUM ↗
- Who funds RED MINISTERIAL DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS DE AMERICA I ↗
- Who funds CENTRO CRISTIANO FAMILIA DE FE INC ↗
- Who funds THE CHRISTIAN COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION OF SOUTH FLORIDA INC ↗
- Who funds The New York City Leadership Center Inc ↗
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 tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Hope for New York · Servant Foundation · Lilly Endowment Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · Raymond James Charitable Endowment Fund · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
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 Redeemer City To City 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.