Skip to content
Ruby's Place Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Ruby's Place Inc

Ruby's place is an innovative nonprofit committed to ending domestic violence, human trafficking, and violent crime through hope, advocacy, and connection.

$3.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$800k
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, FY2019 to 2025.

Crime & Legal$1.1MHuman Services$958kHealth$842kPhilanthropy$610kHousing & Shelter$326kArts & Culture$25kEmployment$13kCivil Rights$13k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $1,582,848, the rows itemized in this filing. The $3,649,661 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $2,066,813 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

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $173k
  • $250k+3 grants · $1.4M
$360,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ARETHREE$800,000
IMPACT INVESTING CHARITABLE FOUNDATION$360,000
NATIONAL CHRISTIAN FOUNDATION$250,000
SHADE MOVEMENT LLC$172,848
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 (FY19–23, $514k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 90% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%ANNIECANNONS INC: $13k → 14%LAS MUJERES UNIDAS Y ACTIVAS: $13k → 10%COVENANT HOUSE OF CALIFORNIA: $186k → 14%COVENANT HOUSE OF CALIFORNIA: $100k → 14%COVENANT HOUSE CALIFORNIA: $70k → 14%COVENANT HOUSE OF CALIFORNIA: $40k → 14%COVENANT HOUSE OF CALIFORNIA: $40k → 14%ALAMEDA COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER: $25k → 10%ALAMEDA CTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER: $22k → 10%ALAMEDA CTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER: $6k → 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.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.3M · 10 repeat orgs$1.0M to everyone else

10 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
6

Total granted

$2.3M
$247k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%
+63%

Still filing today

90%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 18% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $800k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesCrime & LegalHealthPublic Safety & DisasterCivil RightsEmploymentOther
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

  • CH
    COVENANT HOUSE CALIFORNIA
    5× · 2019–2023 · $436k · revenue +67%
  • CH
    COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER NETWORK INC
    3× · 2020–2023 · $274k · revenue +6%
  • AC
    Alameda County Prosecutors Association
    2× · 2023–2024 · $168k · revenue +30% · 53% of their budget

Funded once

  • AC
    ALAMEDA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
    one grant, 2022 · $172k
  • HA
    HAYWARD AREA FORUM OF THE ARTS Sun Gallery
    one grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue 0% · 28% of their budget
  • AI
    AnnieCannons Incgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $13k · revenue +34%
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
California Human Trafficking Investigators and Prosecuters Asso
Crime & Legal
2
Jobs with Justice San Francisco

A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…

Employment
3
Family Violence Law Center

FVLC helps diverse communities in Alameda County heal from domestic violence and sexual assault, advocating for justice and healthy relationships. We provide survivor-centered legal and crisis intervention services, offer prevention for…

Crime & Legal
4
Legal Link

Legal Link removes legal barriers that prolong poverty by adding critically needed capacity to the legal ecosystem.

Crime & Legal
5
Alliance for Asian American Justice Inc

Coordinate pro bono legal aid for victims of anti-Asian violence.

Civil Rights
6
Unitedly

Unitedly is a nonprofit organization based in San Mateo County, California. Unitedly was established to ensure Asian families and communities have access to equitable opportunities and resources to thrive in the San Francisco Bay Area.

Human Services
7
Asian Immigrant Women Advocates Inc

Asian Immigrant Women Advocates empowers low-income, limited English speaking immigrant women and youth through education, leadership development and civic participation programs.

Human Services
8
Alameda County Homeless Action Center

HAC assists homeless and mentally ill clients in the long and difficult process of becoming eligible for SSI and MediCal benefits. HAC provides assistance with other public benefits that clients need in the interim to survive until their…

Housing & Shelter
9
California Center for Movement Legal Services

The California Center for Movement Legal Services (Movement Legal) provides legal services in the pursuit of improving the lives of California's traditionally underserved residents, carrying out legal work that fosters community led policy…

Crime & Legal
10
Justice Funders

Serve as a partner, educator, and guide for philanthropy in reimagining practices that advance a thriving and just world.

—
11
Asian Law Caucus

The Asian Law Caucus's mission is to promote, advance, and represent the legal and civil rights of Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities, recognizing that social, economic, political and racial inequalities continue to exist…

Crime & Legal
12
All for the Family Legal Clinic Inc

Providing low cost and free legal assistance to low income residents of the Bay Area in the areas of family law restraining orders basic immigration uncontested probate and basic immigration issues

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Motivating Inspiring Supporting and Serving Sexually Exploited Youth; the most unlike its peers is Hayward Area Forum of the Arts Sun Gallery. 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

15 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. 15 of the 19 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
11/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SHADE MOVEMENT LLC: $819,670 · OtherSHADE MOVEMENT LLCARETHREE: $800,000 · OtherARETHREEALAMEDA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY: $171,606 · OtherALAMEDA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY+3 more: $72,869 · OtherIMPACT INVESTING CHARITABLE FOUNDATION INC: $360,000 · PhilanthropyIMPACT INVESTING …NATL CHRISTIAN CHARITABLE FDN INC: $250,000 · PhilanthropyNATL CHRISTIAN CH…COVENANT HOUSE CALIFORNIA: $435,866 · Human ServicesCOVENANT HOUSE…ALAMEDA COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC: $52,550 · Human ServicesALAMEDA COUNTY…+2 more: $25,900 · Human ServicesPROGRESSIVE TRANSITIONS INC: $170,370 · Crime & LegalPROGRESSIVE…Love Never Fails Inc: $136,807 · Crime & LegalLove Never …NIHONMACHI LEGAL OUTREACH DBA ASIAN PACIFIC ISLANDER LEGAL OUTREACH: $81,700 · Crime & LegalNIHONMACHI …+1 more: $12,000 · Crime & LegalCOMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER NETWORK INC: $273,960 · HealthAlameda County Prosecutors Association: $168,357 · EmploymentJUSTICE AT LAST INC: $96,000 · Civil Rights
Other$1,864,145Philanthropy$610,000Human Services$514,316Crime & Legal$400,877Health$273,960Employment$168,357Civil Rights$96,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOVENANT HOUSE CALIFORNIA: $435,866 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER NETWORK INC: $273,960 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetPROGRESSIVE TRANSITIONS INC: $170,370 over 4y, 45% of budgetAlameda County Prosecutors Association: $168,357 over 2y, 53% of budgetLove Never Fails Inc: $136,807 over 2y, 15% of budgetJUSTICE AT LAST INC: $96,000 over 3y, 4.7% of budgetNIHONMACHI LEGAL OUTREACH DBA ASIAN PACIFIC ISLANDER LEGAL OUTREACH: $81,700 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetALAMEDA COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER INC: $52,550 over 3y, 9.1% of budgetTEAM RUBICON INC: $35,019 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHAYWARD AREA FORUM OF THE ARTS Sun Gallery: $25,380 over 1y, 28% of budgetAnnieCannons Inc: $13,400 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetMujeres Unidas y Activas: $12,500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMOTIVATING INSPIRING SUPPORTING AND SERVING SEXUALLY EXPLOITED YOUTH: $12,000 over 1y, 0.8% 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.

East Bay Community Fo…The San Francisco Fou…Silicon Valley Commun…Family Violence Law C…Slave 2 Nothing Found…Philanthropic Venture…The James Irvine Foun…Kaiser Foundation Hos…ImpactassetsincAmerican Endowment Fo…American Online Givin…Paypal Charitable Giv…
East Bay Community FoundationCA14.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: East Bay Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Family Violence Law Center · Slave 2 Nothing Foundation · Philanthropic Ventures Foundation · The James Irvine Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Impactassetsinc · American Endowment Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving 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 Ruby's Place Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ruby's Place Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    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 Ruby's Place Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Ruby's Place 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 19 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 Ruby's Place’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