Loading…
Loading…
California · Nonprofit
Dream Youth Clinic (California) is funded by 9 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $845,197 in grants to it, the largest being ESSENTIAL ACCESS HEALTH ($455,168). 2 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
Dream Youth Clinic runs a healthier operating margin than three-quarters of the 9,629 health nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 9,629 health nonprofits under $100k, FY2023
Grant income rose $5k → $46k on a roughly flat funder count — a concentrated base.
3 of 9 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 Dream Youth Clinic’s funders (the co-funder graph). Top 8 of 9 funders by total. Association, not causation.
Dream Youth Clinic leans on a few funders — its largest provides 54% of grant income and the top three 80%; 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 100% · 2023 69% · 2024 55% · 2025 100% — broadly stable.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
0% of Dream Youth Clinic's funders are still giving 2 years after their first grant; 22% 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.
Dream Youth Clinic is locally rooted: 81% of its grant income comes from California 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 9 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.
0%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Operates in 1 state
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2023 (financials across 2023–2023), and the filings of 9funders 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