Skip to content
Aids Walk San Francisco Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Aids Walk San Francisco Foundation

The Foundations vision is to serve the greatest unmet needs of people living with and affected by HIV/AIDS in the San Francisco Bay Area and empower local HIV/AIDS organizations to end the epidemic.Its mission is to raise and distribute funds for San Francisco Bay Area HIV/AIDS service organization that enhance the lives of people living…

$455k
Granted FY2024still arriving
11
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0180% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$1.4MRecreation & Sports$465kFood & Nutrition$362kCrime & Legal$184kPublic Benefit$171kHuman Services$107kEducation$26kYouth Development$22kOther$0
02FY2024 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 11 grants below total $445,487, the rows itemized in this filing. The $454,607 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $9,120 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $163k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $276k
$24,398
Median grant
1
States reached
$362k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
National AIDS Mem Grove$200,000
Castro Country Club$76,155
AIDS Legal Referral Panel$33,518
UCSF 360 Positive Care &Women$31,890
UCSF Alliance$26,342
Santa Rosa Community Health$24,398
Miaha Ruth Cohen Education$12,660
Ward 86$11,896
Huckleberry youth$11,685
Maitri Compassionate Care$10,275
Rainbow Community Center$6,668
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 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Spahr center: $17k → 8%Gay Mens Health Crisis Inc: $23k → 17%Vivent Health: $56k → 17%Spahr center: $14k → 8%West County Health Center: $14k → 9%Positive Resource CntrAIDS: $132k → 10%Positive Resource CntrAIDS: $89k → 10%Santa Rosa Community Health: $24k → 9%Positive Resource CntrAIDS: $72k → 10%Project Inform: $50k → 10%AIDS Legal Referral Panel: $40k → 10%AIDS Legal Referral Panel: $34k → 10%AIDS Legal Referral Panel: $32k → 10%ALRP Legal Eagles: $31k → 10%AIDS Legal Referral Panel: $30k → 10%AIDS Legal Referral Panel: $28k → 10%Misc Grants of 5000 & less: $27k → 10%Positive Resource CntrAIDS: $25k → 10%ALRP Legal Eagles: $22k → 10%AIDS Legal Referral Panel: $21k → 10%Project Inform: $15k → 10%San Francisco AIDS Foundation: $15k → 10%Positive Resource CntrAIDS: $14k → 10%Miaha Ruth Cohen Education: $13k → 10%Miaha Ruth Cohen Education: $13k → 10%National AIDS Mem Grove: $156k → 10%National AIDS Mem Grove: $121k → 10%National AIDS Mem Grove: $94k → 10%National AIDS Mem Grove: $74k → 10%National AIDS Mem Grove: $73k → 10%National AIDS Mem Grove: $58k → 10%Quan Yin Healing Arts Center: $18k → 10%Quan Yin Wellness Fund: $15k → 10%Castro Country Club: $80k → 10%Castro Country Club: $76k → 10%Castro Country Club: $58k → 10%Castro Country Club: $56k → 10%Castro Country Club: $52k → 10%Castro Country Club: $48k → 10%Castro Country Club: $41k → 10%Castro Country Club: $36k → 10%Ward 86: $75k → 10%Ward 86: $38k → 10%Positive Being: $13k → 10%Positive Being: $13k → 10%Project Open Hand: $135k → 10%Project Open Hand: $130k → 10%Project Open Hand: $89k → 10%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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.0M · 22 repeat orgs$230k to everyone else

22 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 13 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
12

Total granted

$3.0M
$179k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+40%

Still filing today

32%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $51k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthFood & NutritionRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • PO
    Project Open Hand
    4× · 2017–2020 · $362k · revenue +139%
  • AL
    AIDS LEGAL REFERRAL PANEL OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA
    6× · 2019–2024 · $184k · revenue +52%
  • TS
    The Spahr Center
    6× · 2017–2023 · $69k · revenue +176%

Funded once

  • VIVENT HEALTH INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $56k · revenue +64%
  • GM
    GAY MEN'S HEALTH CRISIS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $23k · revenue +84%
  • QY
    Quan Yin Healing Arts Center
    one grant, 2017 · $18k
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
Asian and Pacific Islander Wellness Center Inc

Our core belief at San Francisco Community Health Center is that everyone deserves to be healthy and needs access to the highest quality health care. Our mission is to transform lives by advancing health, wellness and equality.

Health
2
Lowell Community Health Center Inc

Lowell community health center's mission is to provide caring, quality, and culturally competent health services to the people of greater lowell, regardless of their financial status; to reduce health disparities and enhance the health of…

Health
3
Primary Care at Home Inc

We provide healthcare and health management services in the Oakland, California Bay Area. We seek to recognize, empathize, and correctly respond to clients individual needs both medically and psychosocially. Everyone in our care is treated…

Health
4
Cascade Aids Project

We promote well-being and advance equity by providing inclusive health and wellness services for lgbtq+ people, people affected by hiv, and all those seeking compassionate care.

Health
5
Chicago House & Social Service Agency

Provides housing and support services to individuals and families impacted by hiv/aids

Health
6
Legacy Community Health Services Inc

The mission of legacy community health services is, "driving healthy change in our communities." our vision is, "connecting our communities to health every day, in every way."

Health
7
Aids Project of the East Bay

Aids project of the east bay (apeb) is focused on the prevention of the spread of hiv and supports individuals living with the virus through programs targeted at some of the most vulnerable and marginalized individuals. apeb seeks to…

Health
8
Southern Arizona Aids Foundation

To promote health, well-being, and social justice for those living with HIV, LGBTQ+ individuals, and communities marginalized by society.

Health
9
Aids Service Center of Lower Manhattan Inc

Aids service center of lower manhattan, inc., d/b/a alliance for positive change ("alliance") is a not-for-profit community organization founded in 1990 with a central mission of helping low-income new yorkers living with hiv and other…

Health
10
Curry Senior Center

To provide services to seniors that promote independent living while maintaining their dignity and self-esteem.

Human Services
11
Northern Nevada Hiv Outpatient Program Education and Services

Northern Nevada Hopes provides affordable, high-quality, medical, behavioral health, and support services for all. We are dedicated to building a healthier community by providing coordinated care and support for individuals and family…

Health
12
Alianza of New Mexico

Alianza's mission is to empower hard-to-reach, vulnerable, and underserved populations through education and supportive services aimed at working with everyone we serve to achieve better outcomes and higher quality of life.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is San Francisco Aids Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Crescentcare Holdings Inc. 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

15 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. 15 of the 36 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

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

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/15
Grantees still filing
11/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

National AIDS Mem Grove: $929,262 · OtherNational AIDS Mem GroveCastro Country Club: $448,706 · OtherCastro Country ClubIndividual grant recipient: $333,087 · OtherIndividual grant recipientWard 86: $170,575 · OtherWard 86UCSF 360 Positive Care &Women: $101,421 · Other+21 more: $559,314 · Other+21 moreProject Open Hand: $361,530 · Food & NutritionProject Open…AIDS LEGAL REFERRAL PANEL OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: $183,609 · HealthAIDS LEGAL R…VIVENT HEALTH INC: $55,634 · HealthVIVENT HEALT…FACE TO FACE SONOMA COUNTY AIDS NETWORK: $31,894 · HealthFACE TO FACE…WEST COUNTY HEALTH CENTERS INC: $27,207 · HealthWEST COUNTY …GAY MEN'S HEALTH CRISIS INC: $23,278 · HealthGAY MEN'S HE…THE HEALTH TRUST: $12,916 · Health+2 more: $16,718 · HealthRainbow Community Center of Contra Costa County: $16,468 · Recreation & Sports
Other$2,542,365Food & Nutrition$361,530Health$351,256Recreation & Sports$16,468

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetProject Open Hand: $361,530 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetAIDS LEGAL REFERRAL PANEL OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: $183,609 over 6y, 1.7% of budgetThe Spahr Center: $68,884 over 6y, 1.9% of budgetProject Inform: $64,936 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetVIVENT HEALTH INC: $55,634 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFACE TO FACE SONOMA COUNTY AIDS NETWORK: $31,894 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetWEST COUNTY HEALTH CENTERS INC: $27,207 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetGAY MEN'S HEALTH CRISIS INC: $23,278 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMAITRI COMPASSIONATE CARE: $18,940 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetRainbow Community Center of Contra Costa County: $16,468 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO AIDS FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE HEALTH TRUST: $12,916 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLIFELONG HEALTH FOR ALL: $9,306 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCRESCENTCARE HOLDINGS INC: $7,412 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetSHANTI PROJECT: $7,254 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

  • Who funds Project Open Hand ↗
  • Who funds AIDS LEGAL REFERRAL PANEL OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA ↗
  • Who funds The Spahr Center ↗
  • Who funds Project Inform ↗
  • Who funds VIVENT HEALTH INC ↗
  • Who funds FACE TO FACE SONOMA COUNTY AIDS NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds WEST COUNTY HEALTH CENTERS INC ↗
  • Who funds GAY MEN'S HEALTH CRISIS INC ↗
  • Who funds MAITRI COMPASSIONATE CARE ↗
  • Who funds Rainbow Community Center of Contra Costa County ↗
  • Who funds SAN FRANCISCO AIDS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE HEALTH TRUST ↗
  • Who funds LIFELONG HEALTH FOR ALL ↗
  • Who funds CRESCENTCARE HOLDINGS INC ↗
  • Who funds SHANTI PROJECT ↗

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.

Broadway Caresequity …Horizons FoundationKaiser Foundation Hos…The Mac AIDS FundThe Estee Lauder Comp…The San Francisco Fou…Bay Area Physicians f…Sutter Bay HospitalsMcNabb FoundationThe California Endowm…Direct ReliefNetwork for Good
Broadway Caresequity Fights AIDS IncNY19.7× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Broadway Caresequity Fights AIDS Inc · Horizons Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · The Mac AIDS Fund · The Estee Lauder Companies Charitable Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Bay Area Physicians for Human Rights · Sutter Bay Hospitals · McNabb Foundation · The California Endowment · Direct Relief · Network for Good

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 Aids Walk San Francisco Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Aids Walk San Francisco 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%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Aids Walk San Francisco Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Aids Walk San Francisco Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 36 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Aids Walk San Francisco’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