Loading…
Loading…
California · Nonprofit
WAVES PROJECT INC (California) is funded by 15 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $489,745 in grants to it, the largest being The Roger I & Ruth B MacFarlane Foundation ($225,000). 6 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
WAVES PROJECT INC has grown faster than half of the 1,244 unclassified nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 1,244 unclassified 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 base broadened — 1 funders to 3 as grant income moved $650 → $25k.
1 of 15 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 2% 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 WAVES PROJECT INC’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation.
WAVES PROJECT INC leans on a few funders — its largest provides 46% of grant income and the top three 76%; 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 100% · 2018 100% · 2019 99% · 2020 44% · 2021 57% · 2022 56% · 2023 100% · 2024 40% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
10% of WAVES PROJECT INC's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 40% 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.
WAVES PROJECT INC draws 54% of its grant income from funders outside California — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 9 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 15 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.
Grants and contracts to this organization from federal (USASpending) and state checkbooks, reconciled to its EIN. $372k on record.
Federal grants vs contracts are distinguished; state line items keep their reported category. Matched by name + geography (the BMF), so coverage is partial and precision-first.
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.
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 15funders 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