Skip to content
Van Alen Institute Projects in Public Architecture at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Van Alen Institute Projects in Public Architecture

Van alen institute helps create equitable cities through community-led inclusive design.

$146k
Granted FY2023
2
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2023.

Community Improvement$677kArts & Culture$154kHousing & Shelter$109kEducation$99kCivil Rights$35kPublic Safety & Disaster$29kOther$0
02FY2023 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $46k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
$100,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$41M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BED-STUY GATEWAY BID$100,000
URBAN DESIGN FORUM$45,905
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 (FY20–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 19%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 90% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%82ND STREET DISTRICT MANAGEMENT: $80k → 13%CREATE IN CHINATOWN INC: $45k → 17%BED-STUY GATEWAY BID: $180k → 20%NORTHWEST BRONX COMMUNITY & CLERGY: $80k → 28%82ND STREET PARTNERSHIP: $19k → 13%CREATE IN CHINATOWN INC DBA THINKCHINATOWN: $29k → 17%BED-STUY GATEWAY BID: $100k → 20%NORTHWEST BRONX COMMUNITY & CLERGY COALITION: $19k → 28%82ND STREET PARTNERSHIP: $10k → 13%FOURTH ARTS BLOCK (FABNYC): $80k → 17%BEDFORD STUYVESANT RESTORATION CORP: $80k → 20%NORTHWEST BRONX COMMUNITY & CLERGY COALITION: $10k → 28%COMMUNITY LEAGUE OF THE: $80k → 17%BED-STUY GATEWAY BID: $80k → 20%BANANA KELLY COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATION INC: $24k → 28%FOURTH ARTS BLOCK (FABNYC): $19k → 17%BEDFORD STUYVESANT RESTORATION CORPORATION: $19k → 20%COMMUNITY LEAGUE OF THE HEIGHTS INC: $19k → 17%BED-STUY GATEWAY BID: $19k → 20%COMMUNITY LEAGUE OF THE HEIGHTS INC: $10k → 17%BEDFORD STUYVESANT RESTORATION CORPORATION: $10k → 20%FOURTH ARTS BLOCK (FABNYC): $10k → 17%ASIAN AMERICANS FOR EQUALITY: $35k → 17%URBAN DESIGN FORUM: $46k → 17%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.

84%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$997k · 7 repeat orgs$183k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +61% since the first grant, against +38% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2023, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
3

Total granted

$997k
$138k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+61%
+38%

Still filing today

86%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 69% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $46k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23
Community ImprovementEducationHousing & ShelterArts & CultureOther
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

  • BS
    BEDFORD STUYVESANT GATEWAY DISTRICT MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION INC
    4× · 2020–2023 · $379k · revenue +43%
  • 8S
    82nd Street District Management Association Inc
    3× · 2020–2022 · $109k · revenue +8%
  • CL
    COMMUNITY LEAGUE OF THE HEIGHTS INC
    3× · 2020–2022 · $109k · revenue +67%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $79k
  • AA
    ASIAN AMERICANS FOR EQUALITY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $35k · revenue +38%
  • BK
    BANANA KELLY COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATIONINC
    one grant, 2021 · $24k · revenue +24%
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
Northeast Brooklyn Housing Develop

The Organization is commited to the preservation, development, and management of affordable housing and home ownership opportunities:community and economic development initiative and human services to effect social change in central…

Housing & Shelter
2
Central Brooklyn Economic Development Corp

Develop and provide affordable housing

Education
3
West Village District Management Association Inc

To improve neighborhood conditions in the west village business improvement district and to enhance the cleanliness, safety and enjoyment of the district.

Community Improvement
4
Brooklyn Heights Association Inc

Brooklyn Heights Association, Inc (BHA) is a Not-For-Profit organization, founded in 1910 and later incorporated in the state of New York in 1948. BHA's primary purpose is the preservation, protection and enhancement of the quality of life…

Community Improvement
5
Bronxville Beautification Council

Provide plants, trees, lighting, fountain and general clean up to public areas in bronxville, ny for the benefit of the entire community.

Community Improvement
6
Washington Heights Business Improvement District

Economic development

Community Improvement
7
Chinatown District Management Association Inc

The organization provides supplemental sanitation, streetscape improvement, visitor information and commercial support services to property owners, businesses and residents of an area established as a business improvement district.

Human Services
8
Downtown Brooklyn Neighborhood Alliance

Provide assistance to downtown brooklyn ny residents. Created to enhance quality of life in NYC and Brooklyn NY promotes a healthier enviornment through community outreach promote developed in the community benefits agreement and NETS…

Community Improvement
9
Union Square Partnership District Management Association Inc

The organization provides supplemental sanitation, public safety, streetscape improvement, visitor information and commercial support services to property owners, businesses and residents of an area established as a business improvement…

Community Improvement
10
Myrtle Avenue Brooklyn District Management Association Inc

To promote the growth of local businesses located in the business improvement district and enhance the overall appearance of the business community.

Community Improvement
11
Brooklyn Navy Yard Development Corp

To manage the brooklyn navy yard for the city of new york, specifically to expand job opportunities for new yorkers by fostering the development of small businesses.

Community Improvement
12
Preserving City Neighborhoods Housing Development Fund Corp

The corporation is organized exclusively for the purpose of perserving and creating, on a non-profit basis, housing projects for persons of low and moderate income. in addition to promoting affordable housing opportunities, it seeks to…

Housing & Shelter
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwest Bronx Community and Clergy Coalition Inc; the most unlike its peers is 82nd Street District Management Association 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

9 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. 9 of the 11 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
8/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BEDFORD STUYVESANT GATEWAY DISTRICT MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION INC: $378,858 · EducationBEDFORD STUYVESANT GATEWAY DISTRICT MANA…THE FORUM FOR URBAN DESIGN: $45,905 · EducationTHE FORUM FOR URBAN DESIGN82nd Street District Management Association Inc: $109,107 · Community Improvement82nd Street District Management A…COMMUNITY LEAGUE OF THE HEIGHTS INC: $108,857 · Community ImprovementCOMMUNITY LEAGUE OF THE HEIGHTS I…Northwest Bronx Community and Clergy Coalition Inc: $108,857 · Community ImprovementNorthwest Bronx Community and Cle…BANANA KELLY COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATIONINC: $23,500 · Community ImprovementBANANA KELLY COMMUNITY IMPROVEMEN…FOURTH ARTS BLOCK (FABNYC): $108,857 · OtherFOURTH ARTS BLOCK (FA…Individual grant recipient: $78,695 · OtherIndividual grant reci…ASIAN AMERICANS FOR EQUALITY INC: $35,357 · OtherASIAN AMERICANS FOR E…Bedford Stuyvesant Restoration Corporation: $109,357 · Housing & ShelterBedford St…CREATE IN CHINATOWN INC: $73,500 · Arts & Culture
Education$424,763Community Improvement$350,321Other$222,909Housing & Shelter$109,357Arts & Culture$73,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBEDFORD STUYVESANT GATEWAY DISTRICT MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION INC: $378,858 over 4y, 19% of budgetBedford Stuyvesant Restoration Corporation: $109,357 over 3y, 0.8% of budget82nd Street District Management Association Inc: $109,107 over 3y, 22% of budgetCOMMUNITY LEAGUE OF THE HEIGHTS INC: $108,857 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetNorthwest Bronx Community and Clergy Coalition Inc: $108,857 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetCREATE IN CHINATOWN INC: $73,500 over 2y, 10% of budgetTHE FORUM FOR URBAN DESIGN: $45,905 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetASIAN AMERICANS FOR EQUALITY INC: $35,357 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBANANA KELLY COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATIONINC: $23,500 over 1y, 0.9% 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.

Association for Neigh…Enterprise Community …The Ford FoundationLocal Initiatives Sup…The Blackbaud Giving …Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Association for Neighborhood & Housing DevelopmentNY15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Association for Neighborhood & Housing Development · Enterprise Community Partners Inc · The Ford Foundation · Local Initiatives Support Corporation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift 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 Van Alen Institute Projects in Public Architecture funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Van Alen Institute Projects in Public Architecture. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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 11 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Van Alen Institute Projects in Public Architecture’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