Loading…
Loading…
California · Nonprofit
WORK2FUTURE FOUNDATION (California) is funded by 6 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $870,801 in grants to it, the largest being The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc ($612,500). 4 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
WORK2FUTURE FOUNDATION is better cushioned than half of the 2,138 employment nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 2,138 employment nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2023
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.
143% of WORK2FUTURE FOUNDATION’s revenue is contributions — more reliant on donations than three-quarters of its peers (52% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 5 of the last 6 reported years ran a deficit.
$110k from 2 funders in 2024, up from $165k and 1 in 2017.
2 of 6 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 4% 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 WORK2FUTURE FOUNDATION’s funders (the co-funder graph). Top 5 of 6 funders by total. Association, not causation.
WORK2FUTURE FOUNDATION leans on a few funders — its largest provides 70% of grant income and the top three 96%; 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: 2017 100% · 2018 100% · 2019 77% · 2020 66% · 2021 72% · 2022 71% · 2023 73% · 2024 91% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
WORK2FUTURE FOUNDATION draws 100% of its grant income from funders outside California — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 5 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 6 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.
82% of spending goes to programs.
100%
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 2018–2023), 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