Loading…
Loading…
Washington, D.C. · Nonprofit
CENTER FOR ENERGY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT (Washington, D.C.) is funded by 12 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $2,590,903 in grants to it, the largest being Berkshire Hathaway Energy Foundation ($799,000). 6 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
CENTER FOR ENERGY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT is better cushioned than half of the 2,564 philanthropy nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 2,564 philanthropy nonprofits $1M–$10M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
81% of CENTER FOR ENERGY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT’s revenue is contributions — about as donation-reliant as the typical peer (84% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 4 of the last 8 reported years ran a deficit.
The base broadened — 3 funders to 4 as grant income moved $47k → $312k.
From the IRS filings of CENTER FOR ENERGY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
CENTER FOR ENERGY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT leans on a few funders — its largest provides 31% of grant income and the top three 86%; half comes from just 2 funders.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 2 funders to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 61% · 2018 56% · 2019 92% · 2020 52% · 2021 80% · 2022 46% · 2023 76% · 2024 64% — growing more concentrated.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
50% of CENTER FOR ENERGY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 50% give in more than one year at all.
Share of funders still giving k years after their first recorded grant, pooled across every acquisition cohort. A funder counts as retained in a year only if it made a grant that year.
CENTER FOR ENERGY WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT draws 66% of its grant income from funders outside Washington, D.C. — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 10 states in all.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 12 funders put you under-funded among the 400 organizations that share them.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
79% of spending goes to programs.
Part of a family of 1 related entity
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2017–2024), and the filings of 12funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing