Skip to content
The Greenlining Institute at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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.

$1.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
25
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$256k
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, FY2021 to 2024.

Environment$2.4MCommunity Improvement$1.5MCivil Rights$1.3MHousing & Shelter$846kHuman Services$440kArts & Culture$360kEducation$337kFood & Nutrition$228kOther$0
02FY2024 · 25 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k20 grants · $600k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $203k
  • $250k+1 grant · $256k
$37,500
Median grant
6
States reached
$44M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FORTH$256,000
SPECIAL SERVICE FOR GROUPS INC$52,500
GES COALITION INC$50,000
BLACK URBAN FARMERS ASSOCIATION$50,000
COASTAL QUEST$50,000
OAKLAND PUBLIC EDUCATION FUND$47,500
LABOR'S TRAINING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE$45,000
CITY HEIGHTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION$45,000
COMMUNITY PARTNERS 4 INNOVATION$45,000
MID CITY COMMUNITY ADVOCACY NETWORK$45,000
RESTORE THE DELTA$45,000
SOUTHWEST DETROIT ENVIRONMENTAL VISION$42,500
EQUITICITY$37,500
EMERALD SOUTH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COLLABORATIVE$35,000
LITTLE MANILA FOUNDATION$35,000
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:

Its 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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Casa Familiar Inc: $200k → 11%CASA FAMILIAR: $25k → 11%Special Services for Group Inc: $150k → 14%SPECIAL SERVICE FOR GROUPS INC: $53k → 14%PARTNERSHIP FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF NEW AMERICANS: $10k → 11%Center for Empowering Refugees and Immigrants: $7k → 10%MISSION EDGE: $10k → 11%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 8% of The Greenlining Institute’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 76% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 63%.

The Greenlining Institutelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 12% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

52%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.8M · 21 repeat orgs$3.5M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +22% since the first grant, against +1% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
27

Total granted

$3.8M
$3.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+1%

Still filing today

100%
89%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 67% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $348k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
Community ImprovementEnvironmentHuman ServicesEducationHousing & 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

  • LM
    LITTLE MANILA RISING
    3× · 2021–2024 · $330k · revenue +353%
  • UC
    URBANMISSION COMMUNITY PARTNERS
    3× · 2022–2024 · $261k · revenue +207%
  • CH
    CITY HEIGHTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
    2× · 2023–2024 · $245k · revenue +22%

Funded once

  • RM
    REDRESS MOVEMENT
    one grant, 2022 · $994k · revenue -35% · 50% of their budget
  • EH
    Environmental Health Coalition
    one grant, 2022 · $200k · revenue -70%
  • EO
    EAST OAKLAND NEIGHBORHOODS INITIATIVE
    one grant, 2023 · $200k
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
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
2
Silicon Valley Rising Action

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.

—
3
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
4
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
5
California Environmental Justice Alliance

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…

Environment
6
Rainier Beach Cummunity Empowerment Coalition

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…

Community Improvement
7
Central California Environmental Justice Network

To uplift low-income communities of color in the San Joaquin Valley by ensuring access to clean air, water, land, and food sovereignty.

Environment
8
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
9
East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy

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…

Public Benefit
10
California Donor Table

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…

Civil Rights
11
Urban Habitat Program

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…

Community Improvement
12
Statewide California Coalition

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.

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc; 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.
05the grantee network

54 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. 54 of the 57 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.

5
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
54/54
Grantees still filing
29/54
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Environmental Health Coalition: $200,000 · EnvironmentEnvironmental Heal…RESTORE THE DELTA: $195,000 · EnvironmentRESTORE THE DELTACleanAIRE NC: $165,000 · EnvironmentCleanAIRE NCCoastal Quest: $150,000 · EnvironmentCoastal QuestAsian Pacific Environmental Network: $150,000 · EnvironmentAsian Pacific Envi…UNITED PARENTS AGAINST LEAD - UPAL: $150,000 · EnvironmentUNITED PARENTS AGA…SOUTHWEST DETROIT ENVIRONMENTAL VISION: $142,500 · EnvironmentSOUTHWEST DETROIT …SOGOREA TE LAND TRUST: $50,000 · EnvironmentSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $50,000 · EnvironmentCITY HEIGHTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $245,000 · Community ImprovementCITY HEIGHTS COMM…WARRENCONNER DEVELOPMENT COALITION: $200,000 · Community ImprovementWARRENCONNER DEVE…ICAFUND: $200,000 · Community ImprovementICAFUNDActive San Gabriel Valley: $200,000 · Community ImprovementActive San Gabrie…MID-CITY COMMUNITY ADVOCACY NETWORK: $195,000 · Community ImprovementMID-CITY COMMUNIT…LATINO AND LATINA ROUNTABLE OF THE SAN GABRIEL & POMONA VALLEYS: $78,400 · Community ImprovementLATINO AND LATINA…GES COALITION INC: $50,000 · Community Improvement+3 more: $50,000 · Community ImprovementREDRESS MOVEMENT: $994,421 · Civil RightsREDRESS MOVEMEN…NATIONAL DAY LABORER ORGANIZING NETWORK: $96,000 · Civil RightsNATIONAL DAY LA…Forth: $256,000 · OtherForthEMERALD SOUTH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COLLOBORATIVE: $235,000 · OtherEMERALD SOUTH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMEN…EAST OAKLAND NEIGHBORHOODS INITIATIVE: $200,000 · OtherEAST OAKLAND NEIGHBORHOODS INITIA…TONGVA TARAXAT PAXAAVXA CONSERVANCY: $200,000 · OtherTONGVA TARAXAT PAXAAVXA CONSERVAN…LABORS TRAINING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE: $120,000 · OtherCASA FAMILIAR INC: $225,000 · OtherCASA FAMILIAR INCSpecial Service for Groups Inc: $202,500 · OtherSpecial Service for Groups IncPROJECT NEW VILLAGE: $227,500 · OtherPROJECT NEW VILLAGEBlack Urban Farmers Association: $125,000 · OtherBlack Urban Farmers AssociationURBANMISSION COMMUNITY PARTNERS: $261,000 · OtherURBANMISSION COMMUNITY PARTNERS+14 more: $253,693 · Other+14 moreSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $255,000 · EducationSOCIAL GOOD …Equiticity: $237,500 · EducationEquiticityTHE OAKLAND PUBLIC EDUCATION FUND: $147,494 · EducationTHE OAKLAND …UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $140,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY O…+2 more: $50,000 · Education+2 moreLITTLE MANILA RISING: $330,000 · Arts & CultureMICHIGAN BLACK EXPO INC: $200,000 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $10,000 · Arts & CultureMycelium Youth Network: $227,500 · Youth DevelopmentProject VOYCE: $200,000 · Youth DevelopmentHIGHER GROUND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CORP: $77,500 · Youth Development
Environment$1,252,500Community Improvement$1,218,400Civil Rights$1,090,421Other$2,305,693Education$829,994Arts & Culture$540,000Youth Development$505,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetREDRESS MOVEMENT: $994,421 over 1y, 50% of budgetLITTLE MANILA RISING: $330,000 over 3y, 9.2% of budgetURBANMISSION COMMUNITY PARTNERS: $261,000 over 3y, 12% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $255,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCITY HEIGHTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $245,000 over 2y, 5.6% of budgetEquiticity: $237,500 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetEMERALD SOUTH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COLLOBORATIVE: $235,000 over 2y, 4.3% of budgetPROJECT NEW VILLAGE: $227,500 over 2y, 12% of budgetMycelium Youth Network: $227,500 over 2y, 25% of budgetCASA FAMILIAR INC: $225,000 over 2y, 3.1% of budgetSpecial Service for Groups Inc: $202,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetEnvironmental Health Coalition: $200,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetWARRENCONNER DEVELOPMENT COALITION: $200,000 over 1y, 5.8% of budgetICAFUND: $200,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetProject VOYCE: $200,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetActive San Gabriel Valley: $200,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetTONGVA TARAXAT PAXAAVXA CONSERVANCY: $200,000 over 1y, 6.6% of budgetMICHIGAN BLACK EXPO INC: $200,000 over 1y, 49% of budgetMID-CITY COMMUNITY ADVOCACY NETWORK: $195,000 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetRESTORE THE DELTA: $195,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetCleanAIRE NC: $165,000 over 2y, 24% of budgetCoastal Quest: $150,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetAsian Pacific Environmental Network: $150,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetUNITED PARENTS AGAINST LEAD - UPAL: $150,000 over 1y, 30% of budgetTHE OAKLAND PUBLIC EDUCATION FUND: $147,494 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetSOUTHWEST DETROIT ENVIRONMENTAL VISION: $142,500 over 2y, 9.7% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $140,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLABORS TRAINING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ALLIANCE: $120,000 over 2y, 7.2% of budgetNATIONAL DAY LABORER ORGANIZING NETWORK: $96,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetLATINO AND LATINA ROUNTABLE OF THE SAN GABRIEL & POMONA VALLEYS: $78,400 over 3y, 21% of budgetHIGHER GROUND NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CORP: $77,500 over 2y, 5.1% of budgetSelf-Help Enterprises: $55,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCONNECT TO COMPETE INC: $50,501 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetSOGOREA TE LAND TRUST: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGES COALITION INC: $50,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $35,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Oakland REACH: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetOAKLAND DIGITAL ARTS AND LITERACY CENTER INC: $25,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetBLACK CULTURAL ZONE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $20,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetOCCUR: $20,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetDAY ONE: $12,400 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetST MARY'S CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetVIETNAMESE AMERICAN COMMUNITY CENTER OF THE EAST BAY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBUILDING OPP FOR SELF-SUFFICIENCY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSOMArts: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMISSION EDGE SAN DIEGO: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSPRING VALLEY COMMUNITY ALLIANCE: $10,000 over 1y, 40% 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 California Endowm…The California Wellne…East Bay Community Fo…The San Francisco Fou…United States Energy …Amalgamated Charitabl…Silicon Valley Commun…ImpactassetsincSolutions Project IncPublic Health Institu…Tides CenterPrice Philanthropies …
The California EndowmentCA36.9× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 The Greenlining Institute funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Greenlining Institute. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    20report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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.

    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 57 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 Greenlining Institute’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