· Public charity
Urban Revival Inc
Ethnic/racial harmony through affordable housing & economic development.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 4 grants below total $109,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $185,650 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $76,650 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $7k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $102k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| TIDES FOUNDATION | $47,000 |
| BROCKTON WORKER ALLIANCE | $30,000 |
| NEW ENGLAND COMMUNITY PROJECT | $25,000 |
| MASS PUBLIC HEALTH ALLIANCE | $7,000 |
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 (FY22–25, $125k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 32% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
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.
5 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $32k 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
RIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE4× · 2020–2024 · $199k · revenue -3%- AFALTERNATIVES FOR COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT INC3× · 2020–2023 · $63k · revenue +210%
- BWBROCKTON WORKERS ALLIANCE INC2× · 2024–2025 · $60k · revenue 0%
Funded once
CENTER FOR ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $397k · revenue +97%- RTRIGHT TO THE CITY BOSTONone grant, 2022 · $70k
- SNSPRINGFIELD NO ONE LEAVESone grant, 2020 · $50k
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.
Aclu foundation of ma was established to defend freedoms guaranteed in the constitution and bill of rights through public education and litigation.
Ceres is a nonprofit advocacy organization working to accelerate the transition to a cleaner, more just, and resilient world. through education and research, we make the business case for action on the most pressing sustainability…
The boston ujima project, inc is a black led, democratic, member-run organization building a cooperative business, arts and investment ecosystem in boston, with a mission to return wealth to working class communities of color. ujima is…
The massachusetts workforce association (mwa) is a statewide membership association that leads, advocates and convenes on behalf of the massachusetts workforce development system.
The mission of the roundtable is to make massachusetts the most desirable place to live, work and do business by engaging private sector executives and public leaders to ensure access to a robust, diverse and talented workforce that…
To strengthen and connect the statewide network of community action agencies and collectively advocate for an end to poverty.
We advocate for just and inclusive policies, processes, and public spaces that ensure all people have safe and accessible mobility and housing options.
The corporation is organized to improve the quality of life in bostons urban communities by building capacity, environmental health, and providing economic opportunity in a manner that responds directly to community needs, interests, and…
The mission of the massachusetts nonprofit network is to unite and strengthen the nonprofit sector in the commonwealth through public policy, public awareness, and capacity building services.
CAA is a community-based civil rights organization that conducts community service, policy advocacy, and movement building activities.
A grassroots, community organization that supports immigrants on issues of workplace rights and immigration. we work with the community, instructing them to execute their rights through organizing, advocacy, education, leadership, capacity…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Labor United Inc and the most unlike its peers is Massachusetts Public Health Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 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. 12 of the 15 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 CENTER FOR ECONOMIC DEMOCRACY INC ↗
- Who funds TIDES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RIGHT TO THE CITY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENT INC ↗
- Who funds BROCKTON WORKERS ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY LABOR UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds CHINESE PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds CHINESE PROGRESSIVE POLITICAL ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds NEW ENGLAND COMMUNITY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds RESIST INC ↗
- Who funds ASIAN AMERICAN RESOURCE WORKSHOP INC ↗
- Who funds MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION ↗
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: Boston Foundation Inc · Barr Foundation · The Hyams Foundation Inc · Resist Inc · Third Sector New England Inc · Eastern Bank Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Access Strategies Fund · Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center Inc · Haymarket People's Fund Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Urban Revival Inc 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Resist Inc — 2% of income from government
- Asian American Resource Workshop Inc — 0% of income from government
- Community Labor United Inc — 0% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Urban Revival Inc?
Find your warmest path to Urban Revival 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.