· Public charity
The Greenlining Institute
THE GREENLINING INSTITUTE ("greenlining") works to build a nation where communities of color thrive and race is never a barrier to economic opportunity.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k20 grants · $600k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $203k
- $250k+1 grant · $256k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FORTH | $256,000 |
| SPECIAL SERVICE FOR GROUPS INC | $52,500 |
| BLACK URBAN FARMERS ASSOCIATION | $50,000 |
| GES COALITION INC | $50,000 |
| COASTAL QUEST | $50,000 |
| OAKLAND PUBLIC EDUCATION FUND | $47,500 |
| COMMUNITY PARTNERS 4 INNOVATION | $45,000 |
| MID CITY COMMUNITY ADVOCACY NETWORK | $45,000 |
| CITY HEIGHTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION | $45,000 |
| RESTORE THE DELTA | $45,000 |
| LABOR'S TRAINING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE | $45,000 |
| SOUTHWEST DETROIT ENVIRONMENTAL VISION | $42,500 |
| EQUITICITY | $37,500 |
| EMERALD SOUTH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COLLABORATIVE | $35,000 |
| LITTLE MANILA FOUNDATION | $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 (FY22–24, $455k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 98% 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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 8% of The Greenlining Institute’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 76% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 63% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +22% since the first grant, against +1% for the ones you funded once.
21 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 6 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, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $348k 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
- LMLITTLE MANILA RISING3× · 2021–2024 · $330k · revenue +353%
- UCURBANMISSION COMMUNITY PARTNERS3× · 2022–2024 · $261k · revenue +207%
- CHCITY HEIGHTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION2× · 2023–2024 · $245k · revenue +22%
Funded once
- RMREDRESS MOVEMENTone grant, 2022 · $994k · revenue -35% · 50% of their budget
- EHEnvironmental Health Coalitionone grant, 2022 · $200k · revenue -70%
- IICAFUNDone grant, 2021 · $200k · revenue +18%
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.
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,…
Silicon Valley Rising Action takes on occupational segregation and income inequality with a comprehensive campaign to raise wages, create affordable housing, and build a tech economy that works for everyone.
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
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…
Our mission is to fight against fossil fuel executives and industries that have turned our communities into dumping grounds for toxic waste, poisoning our air, water, lan, and bodies. We organize to oppose giant oil refineries, dirty…
Urban Habitat democratizes power and advances equitable policies to create a just and connected Bay Area for low-income communities of color. We confront structural inequities impacting historically disenfranchised communities. Through…
Rainier Beach Action Coalition is a grassroot, Black-led organization devoted to locally driven development. It promotes quality education, living wage jobs, affordable transportation and housing, and building community capacity in…
Ebase advances economic, racial and social justice by building a just economy in the east bay on good jobs and healthy communities. we address the root causes of economic injustice by developing strategic alliances amount community, faith…
To uplift low-income communities of color in the San Joaquin Valley by ensuring access to clean air, water, land, and food sovereignty.
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.
California Donor Table anchors a hub of donors, foundations, and community leaders. We pool together our resources to shape California into a truly democratic state that works for the people, not the powerful. Rooted in our commitment to…
The New California Coalition (NCC) is a forward-thinking organization with a bold mission: to identify and implement solutions that will pave the way for enduring, generational change in Sacramento and across the entire state of California.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc and the most unlike its peers is Black Urban Farmers Association. 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 16 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 10% of your grantees by number, and just 24% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 16% 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.
54 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. 54 of the 57 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 REDRESS MOVEMENT ↗
- Who funds LITTLE MANILA RISING ↗
- Who funds URBANMISSION COMMUNITY PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds Forth ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
- Who funds CITY HEIGHTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds Equiticity ↗
- Who funds EMERALD SOUTH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COLLOBORATIVE ↗
- Who funds Mycelium Youth Network ↗
- Who funds PROJECT NEW VILLAGE ↗
- Who funds CASA FAMILIAR INC ↗
- Who funds Special Service for Groups Inc ↗
- Who funds Environmental Health Coalition ↗
- Who funds ICAFUND ↗
- Who funds Active San Gabriel Valley ↗
- Who funds Project VOYCE ↗
- Who funds WARRENCONNER DEVELOPMENT COALITION ↗
- Who funds TONGVA TARAXAT PAXAAVXA CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds MICHIGAN BLACK EXPO INC ↗
- Who funds MID-CITY COMMUNITY ADVOCACY NETWORK ↗
- Who funds RESTORE THE DELTA ↗
- Who funds CleanAIRE NC ↗
- Who funds UNITED PARENTS AGAINST LEAD - UPAL ↗
- Who funds Asian Pacific Environmental Network ↗
- Who funds Coastal Quest ↗
- Who funds THE OAKLAND PUBLIC EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds SOUTHWEST DETROIT ENVIRONMENTAL VISION ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds Black Urban Farmers Association ↗
- Who funds LABORS TRAINING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL DAY LABORER ORGANIZING NETWORK ↗
- Who funds LATINO AND LATINA ROUNTABLE OF THE SAN GABRIEL & POMONA VALLEYS ↗
- Who funds HIGHER GROUND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CORP ↗
- Who funds Self-Help Enterprises ↗
- Who funds CONNECT TO COMPETE INC ↗
- Who funds SOGOREA TE LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC ↗
- Who funds GES COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
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: The California Endowment · The California Wellness Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Solutions Project Inc · Public Health Institute · Tides Center · Price Philanthropies Foundation
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 The Greenlining Institute 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.