Loading…
Loading…
Alabama · Nonprofit
COVENANT RESCUE GROUP (Alabama) is funded by 8 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $399,104 in grants to it, the largest being NATL CHRISTIAN CHARITABLE FDN INC ($246,400). 2 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
COVENANT RESCUE GROUP has grown faster than three-quarters of the 4,797 public safety & disaster nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 4,797 public safety & disaster nonprofits $100k–$1M, 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.
104% of COVENANT RESCUE GROUP’s revenue is contributions — more reliant on donations than three-quarters of its peers (73% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 2 of the last 6 reported years ran a deficit.
The base broadened — 2 funders to 7 as grant income moved $33k → $150k.
3 of 8 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 74% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.
From the IRS filings of COVENANT RESCUE GROUP’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
COVENANT RESCUE GROUP leans on a few funders — its largest provides 62% of grant income and the top three 87%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2020 76% · 2022 100% · 2023 99% · 2024 51% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
COVENANT RESCUE GROUP draws 93% of its grant income from funders outside Alabama — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 5 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 8 funders put you under-funded among the 223 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.
81% of spending goes to programs.
95%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2019–2024), and the filings of 8funders 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