Skip to content
Richmond District Neighborhood Center Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Richmond District Neighborhood Center Inc

Our mission is to nurture a diverse urban community by developing and providing high quality youth, adult, and family programs that address critical community needs and foster respect for all people and our environment.

$124k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$25k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$479kHuman Services$225kCommunity Improvement$47kHousing & Shelter$41k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$24,750
Median grant
1
States reached
$8.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE$24,750
BERNAL HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD$24,750
Southwest Community Corp$24,750
TELEGRAPH HILL NEIGHBORHOOD$24,750
GOOD SAMARITAN Resource CTR$24,750
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 (FY17–25, $361k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Southwest Community Corp: $25k → 10%Southwest Community Corp: $16k → 10%Southwest Community Corp: $13k → 10%Southwest Community Corp: $6k → 10%Southwest Community Corp: $6k → 10%DONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE: $25k → 10%DONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE: $22k → 10%DONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE: $17k → 10%DONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE: $17k → 10%DONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE: $17k → 10%DONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE: $17k → 10%DONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE: $14k → 10%DONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE: $13k → 10%BERNAL HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD: $25k → 10%BERNAL HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD: $22k → 10%BERNAL HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD: $17k → 10%BERNAL HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD: $16k → 10%BERNAL HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD: $16k → 10%BERNAL HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD: $14k → 10%BERNAL HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD: $14k → 10%MISSION NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS: $12k → 10%MISSION NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS: $12k → 10%BERNAL HEIGHTS NEIGHBORHOOD: $9k → 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.

99%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$783k · 8 repeat orgs$8k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +177% since the first grant, against -2% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
1

Total granted

$783k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+177%
-2%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementYouth DevelopmentEducationOther
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

  • TH
    Telegraph Hill Neighborhood Association
    9× · 2017–2025 · $161k · revenue +185%
  • GS
    Good Samaritan Family Resource Center of San Francisco
    9× · 2017–2025 · $153k · revenue +184%
  • DONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE
    8× · 2017–2025 · $140k · revenue +70%

Funded once

  • SAN FRANCISCO STUDY CENTER INC
    one grant, 2023 · $8k · revenue -2%
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
Homeless Childrens Network

To provide direct mental health services, psychotherapy, and counseling to homeless families in San Francisco, CA and in particular to children of such families, to provide referral services for such families and their children to other…

Human Services
2
San Francisco Filipino Cultural Center
Arts & Culture
3
Chinatown Community Childrens Center

Our mission is to prepare children for Kindergarten and beyond by promoting educational achievement, ensuring household economic stability and strengthening cultural identity. We fulfill our mission by operating 2 core programs the child…

Human Services
4
Children's Council of San Francisco

By advocating for quality early care and education, empowering families with information and financial support, and building the capabilities of educators, Children's Council of San Francisco ensures that every child in San Francisco has…

Human Services
5
Family Bridges Inc

We empower individuals, families, and seniors to achieve wellness, stability, and independence through culturally-competent care.

—
6
Bayanihan Equity Center

The Bayanihan Equity Center provides culturally responsive services to address the needs and advance the rights of marginalized communities in pursuit of equity and justice.

Public Benefit
7
Curry Senior Center

To provide services to seniors that promote independent living while maintaining their dignity and self-esteem.

Human Services
8
Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation

Tndc's mission is to develop community and provide affordable housing and services for people with low incomes in the tenderloin and throughout san francisco, to promote equitable access to opportunity and resources.

Housing & Shelter
9
Community Youth Center of San Francisco

Our mission is to encourage a diverse population of high-need young people to explore their full potential through academic, career, family, and community life. Every year, CYC impacts over 8,000 San Francisco youth and their families,…

—
10
Wellnest Emotional Health & Wellness

Through a holistic approach to emotional well-being, Wellnest offers hope, healing, and opportunity to the children, young adults, families, and communities we serve. Our commitment remains steadfast as we enter our second century of…

Human Services
11
FranDelJA Enrichment Center

FranDelJA provides full day, year round childcare for children ages 6 weeks to 5 years of age.

Youth Development
12
Marina Counseling Center

To provide high-quality, heart-centered, affordable, and accessible psychotherapy to our diverse San Francisco/Bay Area communities. The MCC offers excellent training and supervision for the next generation of mental health professionals.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mission Neighborhood Centers Inc; the most unlike its peers is Southwest Community Corporation. 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE: $139,864 · Human ServicesDONALDINA CAMERON HOUSEBernal Heights Neighborhood Center: $131,164 · Human ServicesBernal Heights Neighborhood CenterSOUTHWEST COMMUNITY CORPORATION: $66,150 · Human ServicesSOUTHWEST COMMUNITY CORPORATIONMission Neighborhood Centers Inc: $23,714 · Human ServicesMission Neighborhood Centers IncGood Samaritan Family Resource Center of San Francisco: $153,064 · OtherGood Samaritan Family Resour…RICHMOND DISTRICT NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER INC: $45,714 · OtherRICHMOND DISTRICT NEIGHBORHO…Telegraph Hill Neighborhood Association: $161,364 · Community ImprovementTelegraph Hill Neighbor…BOOKER T WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER: $62,214 · Youth DevelopmentSAN FRANCISCO STUDY CENTER INC: $8,076 · Education
Human Services$360,892Other$198,778Community Improvement$161,364Youth Development$62,214Education$8,076

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTelegraph Hill Neighborhood Association: $161,364 over 9y, 0.4% of budgetGood Samaritan Family Resource Center of San Francisco: $153,064 over 9y, 0.5% of budgetDONALDINA CAMERON HOUSE: $139,864 over 8y, 1.0% of budgetBernal Heights Neighborhood Center: $131,164 over 8y, 0.6% of budgetSOUTHWEST COMMUNITY CORPORATION: $66,150 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetBOOKER T WASHINGTON COMMUNITY SERVICE CENTER: $62,214 over 6y, 1.0% of budgetRICHMOND DISTRICT NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER INC: $45,714 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetMission Neighborhood Centers Inc: $23,714 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO STUDY CENTER INC: $8,076 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Metta FundCrankstart FoundationThe San Francisco Fou…Bothin FoundationSilicon Valley Commun…Tipping Point Communi…Low Income Investment…Tides CenterNetwork for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Metta FundCA22.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Metta Fund · Crankstart Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Bothin Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Tipping Point Community · Low Income Investment Fund · Tides Center · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Richmond District Neighborhood Center Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Richmond District Neighborhood Center Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Richmond District Neighborhood Center Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Richmond District Neighborhood Center Inc 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 9 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 Richmond District Neighborhood Center’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