Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

A Charles & Betty S Wilson 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.

$97k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$21k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Education$318kHealth$216kEmployment$60kCrime & Legal$11kSocial Science$6kReligion$2k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $87k
$17,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$504k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE$21,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF LOS ANGELES$18,000
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GOULD SCHOOL OF LAW$17,000
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES SCHOOL OF LAW$17,000
CEDARS SINAI$14,000
JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE$8,500
CHABAD HOUSE COMMUNITY CENTER$1,000
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

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

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%KISS INSTITUTE FOR PRACTICAL ROBOTICS: $8k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GOULD SCHOOL OF LAW: $17k → 14%KISS INSTITUTE FOR PRACTICAL ROBOTICS: $4k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES SCHOOL OF LAW: $17k → 14%KIIS INSTITUTE: $2k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GOULD SCHOOL OF LAW: $16k → 14%KIIS INSTITUTE: $2k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES SCHOOL OF LAW: $16k → 14%KIIS INSTITUTE: $2k → 13%USC GOULD SCHOOL OF LAW: $15k → 14%KISS INSTITUTE FOR PRACTICAL ROBOTICS: $2k → 13%UCLA SCHOOL OF LAW: $15k → 14%USC GOULD SCHOOL OF LAW: $13k → 14%UCLA SCHOOL OF LAW: $13k → 14%LAW SCHOOL OF USC: $13k → 14%UCLA SCHOOL OF LAW: $13k → 14%LAW SCHOOL OF USC: $12k → 14%UCLA SCHOOL OF LAW: $12k → 14%LAW SCHOOL OF USC: $12k → 14%UCLA SCHOOL OF LAW: $12k → 14%THE LAW SCHOOL: $10k → 14%UCLA SCHOOL OF LAW: $10k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $16k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $15k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $14k → 14%JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE: $24k → 14%JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE: $21k → 14%JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE: $20k → 14%JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE: $19k → 14%JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE: $16k → 14%JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE: $15k → 14%JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE: $15k → 14%CEDARS SINAI: $14k → 14%CEDARS SINAI: $14k → 14%JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE: $14k → 14%CEDARS SINAI: $14k → 14%CEDARS SINAI: $12k → 14%CEDARS SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $10k → 14%CEDARS SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $10k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF LOS ANGELES: $18k → 14%CEDARS SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $10k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF LOS ANGELES: $18k → 14%CEDARS SINAI: $9k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES: $16k → 14%JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE: $9k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES: $11k → 14%JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE: $8k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES: $15k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$602k · 12 repeat orgs$11k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +60% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

12 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
2

Total granted

$602k
$11k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+60%
0%

Still filing today

25%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
HealthEducationCrime & LegalOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

  • CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER
    8× · 2017–2025 · $93k · revenue +63%
  • PLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES
    5× · 2021–2025 · $78k · revenue +29%
  • KI
    KISS Institute for Practical Robotics
    3× · 2021–2024 · $14k · revenue +60%

Funded once

  • TL
    THE LAW SCHOOL
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
  • LA
    LOS ANGELES SHERIFFS FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue 0%

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

04Your field
04the grantee network

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

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 4 of the 14 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/4
Grantees still filing
3/4
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

JEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICE — $160,500 · OtherJEWISH VOCATIONAL SERVICEUCLA SCHOOL OF LAW — $73,500 · OtherUCLA SCHOOL OF LAWPLANNED PARENTHOOD — $45,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOODLAW SCHOOL OF USC — $36,000 · OtherLAW SCHOOL OF USCUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GOULD SCHOOL OF LAW — $33,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GOULD SCHOOL OF LAWUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES SCHOOL OF LAW — $33,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES SCHOOL OF LAWUSC GOULD SCHOOL OF LAW — $28,000 · OtherUSC GOULD SCHOOL OF LAW+3 more — $17,500 · OtherCEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER — $93,000 · HealthCEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTERPLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES — $78,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELESKISS Institute for Practical Robotics — $14,000 · EducationLOS ANGELES SHERIFFS FOUNDATION — $1,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$426,500Health$171,000Education$14,000Crime & Legal$1,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER — $93,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES — $78,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetKISS Institute for Practical Robotics — $14,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetLOS ANGELES SHERIFFS FOUNDATION — $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

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

  • Who funds CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES
  • Who funds KISS Institute for Practical Robotics
  • Who funds LOS ANGELES SHERIFFS FOUNDATION

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization A Charles & Betty S Wilson Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 30%
  • Kiss Institute for Practical Robotics30% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 14 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

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

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph