Skip to content
2 G Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

2 G Charitable Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$3k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Youth Development$18kHuman Services$5kPublic Safety & Disaster$5kInternational$4kAnimals$1k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$63k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE SANTA BARBARA BUCKET BRIGADE$2,000
CHARLOTTESVILLE ALBEMARLE SPCA$1,250
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%TOGETHER1HEART: $3k → 14%SOLID FOUNDATIONS: $3k → 14%MERCADO GLOBAL: $2k → 20%WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN: $3k → 14%SOLID FOUNDATIONS: $3k → 14%MERCADO GLOBAL: $2k → 20%SOLID FOUNDATIONS: $3k → 14%SOLID FOUNDATIONS: $2k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$22k · 3 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
3

Total granted

$22k
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+70%
+210%

Still filing today

100%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalYouth DevelopmentEducationHuman ServicesPublic Safety & DisasterAnimalsOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • SF
    SOLID FOUNDATIONS
    4× · 2021–2024 · $11k · revenue -34%
  • F4
    FREEDOM 4 YOUTH
    2× · 2019–2020 · $6k · revenue ×14
  • MG
    MERCADO GLOBAL INC
    2× · 2017–2021 · $4k · revenue +70%

Funded once

  • WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $3k · revenue ×11
  • T
    TOGETHER1HEART
    one grant, 2019 · $3k · revenue +210%
  • HT
    HEARTS THERAPEUTIC EQUESTRIAN CENTERgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue +93%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Santa Barbara Humane Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Santa barbara humane operates two campuses located in santa barbara and santa maria providing care for community-owned and homeless animals. both campuses offer affordable high quality veterinary care, compassionate behavior training…

Animals
2
Foodbank of Santa Barbara County Inc

To end hunger and transform the health of our community by providing nourishment to those in need by acquiring and distributing safe nutritious food via local agencies and by providing education to solve hunger and nutritional problems in…

Food & Nutrition
3
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County

The SPCA Monterey County's Mission is assuring compassionate treatment of all animals through rescue, rehabilitation, protection and education. The SPCA shelters homeless, neglected, and abused pets, including dogs, cats, horses, exotic…

Animals
4
Asociacion Civil Awamaki

We work with andean women artisans to create economic opportunities together, so they can start and run their own businesses. we offer education in technical skills, business skills and leadership. we connect them to market opportunities…

International
5
Young Women's Freedom Center

The core mission of the young women's freedom center is to inspire and empower young women who have been involved in the juvenile justice system, criminal justice system, and/or the underground street economy to create a positive change in…

Human Services
6
World Vets

To improve the health & well-being of animals through veterinary aid, response, training, research & local capacity building worldwide. We provide services to companion animals, horses, street dogs, livestock and marine animals including…

Animals
7
Community Action Commission of Santa Barbara County Inc

Cac serves santa barbara county's vulnerable populations through education and coordinated services so they may achieve economic stability, improve overall well-being and thrive.

Human Services
8
Compassion Without Borders

Compassion without borders provides a brighter future for animals in need on both sides of the border. our mission is to find the animals that are in the most urgent need of help, yet the least likely to be helped due to geographic,…

Animals
9
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
10
Santa Barbara Partners in Education

Our mission is to empower students for the world ahead through business, school, and community collaboration. we do this by creating and supporting inspiring, skill-building opportunities for youth along their tk-12 journey.

Education
11
Food Empowerment Project

Food Empowerment Project seeks to create a more just and sustainable world by recognizing the power of one's food choices.

Food & Nutrition
12
Brazilian Cultural Arts Center of Santa Barbara

Brazilian Cultural Arts Center of Santa Barbara is dedicated to promoting and preserving the rich cultural heritage of capoeira. Its mission is to use capoeira as a tool for community development, education, and cultural exchange.

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hearts Therapeutic Equestrian Center; the most unlike its peers is Solid Foundations. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

8 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SOLID FOUNDATIONS: $11,300 · Youth DevelopmentSOLID FOUNDATIONSMERCADO GLOBAL INC: $4,250 · InternationalMERCADO GLOBAL INCWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $2,570 · InternationalWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN I…FREEDOM 4 YOUTH: $6,270 · EducationFREEDOM 4 YOUTHTOGETHER1HEART: $2,570 · OtherHEARTS THERAPEUTIC EQUESTRIAN CENTER: $2,250 · Human ServicesSanta Barbara Bucket Brigade: $2,000 · Public Safety & DisasterALBEMARLE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS INC: $1,250 · Animals
Youth Development$11,300International$6,820Education$6,270Other$2,570Human Services$2,250Public Safety & Disaster$2,000Animals$1,250

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSOLID FOUNDATIONS: $11,300 over 4y, 4.7% of budgetFREEDOM 4 YOUTH: $6,270 over 2y, 4.7% of budgetMERCADO GLOBAL INC: $4,250 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $2,570 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTOGETHER1HEART: $2,570 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetHEARTS THERAPEUTIC EQUESTRIAN CENTER: $2,250 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetALBEMARLE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS INC: $1,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

American Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Endowment FoundationOH9.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization 2 G Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from 2 G Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 8 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on 2 G’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home