Skip to content
Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

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.

$8.3M
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$8.1M
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 2024.

Housing & Shelter$21MYouth Development$299kCommunity Improvement$295k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $225k
  • $250k+1 grant · $8.1M
$8,054,498
Median grant
1
States reached
$114M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TURK STREET INC$8,054,498
POLK SENIOR HOUSING ASSOCIATES LP$225,000
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%YOUNG COMMUNITY DEVELOPERS: $75k → 10%YOUTH COMMUNITY DEVELOPERS: $59k → 10%TURK STREET INC: $8.1M → 10%TURK STREET INC: $4.8M → 10%TURK STREET INC: $2.6M → 10%TURK STREET INC: $1.5M → 10%TAYLOR FAMILY HOUSING INC: $1.2M → 10%TURK STREET INC: $956k → 10%AMBASSADOR STREET INC: $929k → 10%POLK SENIOR HOUSING ASSOCIATES LP: $225k → 10%TURK STREET INC: $178k → 10%HOWARD STREET DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $125k → 10%TURK STREET INC: $74k → 10%ELLIS STREET INC: $60k → 10%TURK AND EDDY ASSOCIATES LP: $50k → 10%EDDY AND TAYLOR ASSOCIATES LP: $50k → 10%HAIGHT STREET SENIOR HOUSING INC: $50k → 10%TAYLOR FAMILY HOUSING INC: $20k → 10%HOWARD STREET DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $10k → 10%WITHOUT WALLS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $75k → 10%WITHOUT WALLS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $74k → 10%CHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $75k → 10%CHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $60k → 10%CHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $30k → 10%MISSION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY: $75k → 10%COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER OF SAN FRANCISCO: $75k → 10%MISSION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY: $60k → 10%COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER: $60k → 10%MISSION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY: $60k → 10%COMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER: $30k → 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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$20M · 8 repeat orgs$1.4M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +103% since the first grant, against -98% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
5

Total granted

$20M
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+103%
-98%

Still filing today

100%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $225k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Housing & ShelterYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • TS
    TURK STREET INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $18M · revenue +503% · 75% of their budget
  • TF
    TAYLOR FAMILY HOUSING INC
    2× · 2017–2021 · $1.2M · revenue ×33 · 89% of their budget
  • ME
    MISSION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
    3× · 2017–2019 · $195k · revenue +103%

Funded once

  • AS
    AMBASSADOR SRO INC
    one grant, 2020 · $929k · revenue -100% · 66% of their budget
  • ES
    ELLIS STREET INC
    one grant, 2022 · $60k · revenue -98% · 70% of their budget
  • EA
    EDDY AND TAYLOR ASSOCIATES LP
    one grant, 2023 · $50k
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
Tndc Supporting Fund

To engage in charitable and educational activities that support, benefit and carry out the purposes of tenderloin neighborhood development corporation, a tax exempt 501(c)(3) organization that provides affordable housing to low and…

Housing & Shelter
2
Ward Economic Development Corporation

Ward economic development corporation (wedc) was incorporated on november 12, 1987 pursuant to the general nonprofit corporation law of the state of california. wedc was created to achieve the following: (1) to identify and pursue economic…

—
3
O'farrell Senior Housing Inc

To provide housing for low income persons, and to support tenderloin neighborhood development corporation in carrying out its purpose.

Housing & Shelter
4
Inland Socal Housing Collective

Creating solutions to improve housing outcomes for renters, homebuyers, homeowners, and those experiencing homelessness through education, advocacy and access to resources in the inland socal region.

Housing & Shelter
5
Hip Housing Development Corporation

To alleviate and improve the housing condition of the needy, physically or mentally handicapped, elderly persons and others whose housing needs are not being adequately met in San Mateo County, CA.

Housing & Shelter
6
Tenants Development Corporation

The promotion, maintenance and management of housing in the south end of boston, massachusetts, to low and moderate-income families of every race, religion, and nationality.

Housing & Shelter
7
Charities Housing Development Corp of Santa Clara County

To develop, preserve, & manage high quality affordable housing for low-income individuals & their families. through service enhanced property management & structured resident involvement, chdc contributes to the highest standards of human…

Housing & Shelter
8
Community Resources and Housing Development Corporation

Community resources and housing development corporation provides pathways to home and asset building opportunities to benefit low-to-moderate income communities throughout colorado.

Housing & Shelter
9
Sacramento Neighborhood Housing Services Inc

To improve and restore district-wide neighborhoods for the benefit of the residents.

Housing & Shelter
10
Homes for California Dba Homes for Sonoma

Homes for Sonoma is a nonprofit developer creating quality workforce housing options that support safe and sustainable community, and finds efficient, scalable solutions to address the housing crisis in Sonoma County and throughout…

Housing & Shelter
11
Burbank Housingsr Corporation

To own and operate affordable rental housing.

—
12
City Heights Community Development Corporation

Enhance the quality of life in city heights by working with our community to create and sustain quality affordable housing & livable neighborhoods & foster economic self-sufficiency.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Howard Street Development Corporation; the most unlike its peers is Young Community Developers 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

11 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. 11 of the 14 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)
11/11
Grantees still filing
6/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TURK STREET INC: $18,135,381 · Housing & ShelterTURK STREET INCTAYLOR FAMILY HOUSING INC: $1,222,300 · Housing & ShelterTAYLOR FAMILY HOUSING INCAMBASSADOR SRO INC: $928,801 · Housing & Shelter+5 more: $558,852 · Housing & ShelterPOLK SENIOR HOUSING ASSOCIATES LP: $225,000 · OtherMISSION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY: $194,850 · OtherCOMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER OF SAN FRANCISCO: $164,850 · OtherEDDY AND TAYLOR ASSOCIATES LP: $50,000 · OtherTURK AND EDDY ASSOCIATES LP: $50,000 · OtherYOUNG COMMUNITY DEVELOPERS INC: $134,040 · Youth Development
Housing & Shelter$20,845,334Other$684,700Youth Development$134,040

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 budgetTURK STREET INC: $18,135,381 over 7y, 75% of budgetTAYLOR FAMILY HOUSING INC: $1,222,300 over 2y, 89% of budgetAMBASSADOR SRO INC: $928,801 over 1y, 66% of budgetMISSION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY: $194,850 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY YOUTH CENTER OF SAN FRANCISCO: $164,850 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetCHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $164,850 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetWITHOUT WALLS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $149,350 over 2y, 88% of budgetHOWARD STREET DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $134,652 over 2y, 73% of budgetELLIS STREET INC: $60,000 over 1y, 70% of budgetHAIGHT STREET SENIOR HOUSING INC: $50,000 over 1y, 7.0% 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.

The San Francisco Fou…East West Bank Founda…Crankstart FoundationUnited Way of the Bay…Amalgamated Charitabl…Silicon Valley Commun…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The San Francisco FoundationCA14.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The San Francisco Foundation · East West Bank Foundation · Crankstart Foundation · United Way of the Bay Area · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%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 · 0–10%
    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.

    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 14 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 Tenderloin Neighborhood Development’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