Loading…
Loading…
Arizona · Nonprofit
DESERT FINANCIAL FOUNDATION (Arizona) is funded by 6 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $1,249,194 in grants to it, the largest being DESERT FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION ($970,775). 4 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
DESERT FINANCIAL FOUNDATION 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.
110% of DESERT FINANCIAL FOUNDATION’s revenue is contributions — more reliant on donations than three-quarters of its peers (84% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 3 of the last 7 reported years ran a deficit.
The base broadened — 1 funders to 2 as grant income moved $8k → $282k.
2 of 6 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 18% 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 DESERT FINANCIAL FOUNDATION’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
DESERT FINANCIAL FOUNDATION leans on a few funders — its largest provides 78% of grant income and the top three 99%; 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: 2018 100% · 2020 100% · 2021 95% · 2022 74% · 2023 55% · 2024 99% — broadly stable.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
DESERT FINANCIAL FOUNDATION is locally rooted: 82% of its grant income comes from Arizona funders.
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 6 funders put you under-funded among the 314 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.
100% of spending goes to programs.
70%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Operates in 1 state
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 2018–2024), and the filings of 6funders 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