Loading…
Loading…
Maryland · Nonprofit
SEED FOR CHANGE (Maryland) is funded by 7 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $516,673 in grants to it, the largest being Mercury One Inc ($218,185). 5 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
SEED FOR CHANGE runs a healthier operating margin than three-quarters of the 2,967 international nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 2,967 international nonprofits under $100k, FY2021
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.
252% of SEED FOR CHANGE’s revenue is contributions — more reliant on donations than three-quarters of its peers (100% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 2 of the last 5 reported years ran a deficit.
$31k from 2 funders in 2024, up from $217k and 3 in 2017.
6 of 7 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 58% 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 SEED FOR CHANGE’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
SEED FOR CHANGE leans on a few funders — its largest provides 42% of grant income and the top three 90%; 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 68% · 2018 53% · 2019 64% · 2020 43% · 2021 100% · 2022 50% · 2023 66% · 2024 67% — broadly stable.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
SEED FOR CHANGE draws 96% of its grant income from funders outside Maryland — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 6 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.
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%
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 FY2021 (financials across 2017–2021), and the filings of 7funders 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