Loading…
Loading…
Washington · Nonprofit
VISION HOUSE (Washington) is funded by 84 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $8,717,190 in grants to it, the largest being SCHWAB CHARITABLE FUND ($1,688,350). 50 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
VISION HOUSE has grown faster than half of the 9,516 human services nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 9,516 human services 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.
Government-grant reliance: 2024 7%. Grants only — government contracts and fees sit inside program revenue.
69% of VISION HOUSE’s revenue is contributions — about as donation-reliant as the typical peer (81% 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.
Grant income rose $95k → $450k on a roughly flat funder count — a concentrated base.
18 of 84 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 57% 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 VISION HOUSE’s funders (the co-funder graph). Top 30 of 84 funders by total. Association, not causation.
VISION HOUSE has a broad base — no single funder exceeds 19% of grant income, and it takes 5 funders to reach half.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 5 funders to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 42% · 2018 32% · 2019 29% · 2020 24% · 2021 16% · 2022 19% · 2023 16% · 2024 37% · 2025 79% — growing more concentrated.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
46% of VISION HOUSE's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 60% 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.
VISION HOUSE draws 56% of its grant income from funders outside Washington — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 24 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 84 funders put you typical 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.
80% of spending goes to programs.
87%
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 2017–2024), and the filings of 84funders 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