Skip to content
Albert & Pamela Bendich Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Albert & Pamela Bendich Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$50k
Granted FY2022
1
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2022.

Civil Rights$331kEnvironment$72kInternational$54kAnimals$33kHuman Services$32kFood & Nutrition$21kEducation$20kHealth$19kOther$0
02FY2022 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$50,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$33k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ACLU$50,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–20, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%PROGRAM FOR EARLY PARENT SUPPORT: $2k → 9%PROGRAM FOR EARLY PARENT SUPPORT: $2k → 9%PROGRAM FOR EARLY PARENT SUPPORT: $2k → 9%PROGRAM FOR EARLY PARENT SUPPORT: $2k → 9%FACING HOMELESSNESS: $500 → 9%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
MN
IL
MI
NY
MA
OR
WY
OH
CA
UT
VA
MD
AZ
DC
AL
GA
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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$569k · 46 repeat orgs$26k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +59% since the first grant, against +50% for those funded once.

46 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2022, 45 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

46
14

Total granted

$569k
$26k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+59%
+50%

Still filing today

80%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2022, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22
AnimalsEnvironmentInternationalHuman ServicesHealthFood & NutritionOther
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

  • NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC
    4× · 2017–2021 · $20k · revenue +41%
  • PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
    4× · 2017–2021 · $16k · revenue +120%
  • MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC
    4× · 2017–2021 · $12k · revenue +98%

Funded once

  • TP
    THE PEOPLES VANGUARD OF DAVIS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue +94%
  • TD
    THE DAVIS VANGUARD 11TH ANNUAL EVENT
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
  • BC
    BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC
    one grant, 2020 · $4k · revenue -28%
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
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
2
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
3
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
4
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
5
Rainforest Alliance Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

—
6
Institute for Agriculture & Trade Policy

Iatp works locally and globally at the intersection of policy and practice to ensure fair and sustainable food, farm and trade systems.

Food & Nutrition
7
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
8
National Audubon Society Inc

We work towards a future where birds thrive across the americas because audubon is a powerful, diverse, and ever-growing force for conservation. (continued on schedule o).

Environment
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
Chile-California Council

The Chile-California Council is a San Francisco-based nonprofit dedicated to developing and promoting joint endeavors and cooperative relations between Chile and California, as well as individuals, legal entities and other institutions in…

International
11
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
12
Property and Environment Research Center

Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated; the most unlike its peers is The Peoples Vanguard of Davis 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

49 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. 49 of the 63 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
49/49
Grantees still filing
41/49
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ACLU: $325,500 · OtherACLUCHILD CARE RESOURCES: $25,000 · OtherCHILD CARE RESOURCES+24 more: $72,800 · Other+24 moreNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $20,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL R…SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $14,000 · EnvironmentSIERRA CL…AUDUBON CANYON RANCH INC: $4,000 · EnvironmentAUDUBON C…WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $4,000 · EnvironmentWORLD WIL…ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $3,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONME…OCEAN CONSERVANCY: $3,000 · EnvironmentOCEAN CON…Earth Island Institute Inc: $2,000 · EnvironmentRainforest Action Network: $2,000 · Environment+2 more: $1,500 · EnvironmentMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $12,000 · InternationalTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $10,000 · InternationalHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $7,500 · InternationalTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $6,000 · InternationalInternational Rescue Committee INC: $3,000 · InternationalUPAYA SOCIAL VENTURES: $2,500 · InternationalFINCA INTERNATIONAL INC: $2,000 · International+1 more: $1,000 · InternationalMONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION: $10,000 · AnimalsWildlife Conservation Society: $5,000 · AnimalsTHE SAN FRANCISCO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $4,000 · AnimalsNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $4,000 · AnimalsEAST BAY SPCA: $3,000 · AnimalsBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $3,000 · AnimalsANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $3,000 · AnimalsDefenders of Wildlife: $3,000 · AnimalsTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $2,500 · AnimalsAlley Cat Allies Inc: $2,000 · Animals+1 more: $1,000 · AnimalsPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $15,500 · HealthTHE FOUNDATION FOR EXCELLENCE IN MENTAL HEALTH CARE INC: $4,500 · HealthBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $3,500 · HealthMARIN AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST: $10,000 · Food & NutritionProject Open Hand: $2,000 · Food & NutritionPROGRAM FOR EARLY PARENT SUPPORT: $6,500 · Human ServicesTHE PEOPLES VANGUARD OF DAVIS INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesFACING HOMELESSNESS: $500 · Human Services
Other$423,300Environment$53,500International$44,000Animals$40,500Health$23,500Food & Nutrition$12,000Human Services$12,000

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 budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $15,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $14,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $12,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CARTER CENTER INC: $10,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMARIN AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST: $10,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC: $7,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $7,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPROGRAM FOR EARLY PARENT SUPPORT: $6,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $6,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PEOPLES VANGUARD OF DAVIS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR EXCELLENCE IN MENTAL HEALTH CARE INC: $4,500 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTHE SAN FRANCISCO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $4,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetAUDUBON CANYON RANCH INC: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY CHILD DEVELOPMENT SCHOOL: $4,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $3,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEAST BAY SPCA: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $3,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetDefenders of Wildlife: $3,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $3,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $3,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUPAYA SOCIAL VENTURES: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $2,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC: $2,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSonora Area Foundation: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFINCA INTERNATIONAL INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetThe Center for Investigative Reporting Inc: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAlley Cat Allies Inc: $2,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWILDCARE: $2,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRainforest Action Network: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetProject Open Hand: $2,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHWEST HARVEST EMM: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $1,250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGRAMEEN FOUNDATION USA: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMAZON A Jewish Response to Hunger: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFACING HOMELESSNESS: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY: $500 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.

Morgan Stanley Global…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Network for GoodNational Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…American Endowment Fo…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust IncIN12.5× affinity7 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Network for Good · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Albert & Pamela Bendich Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Albert & Pamela Bendich Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 Albert & Pamela Bendich Charitable Trust?

Find your warmest path to Albert & Pamela Bendich Charitable Trust 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 63 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Albert & Pamela Bendich’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