· Private foundation
Alumbra Innovations Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k20 grants · $56k
- $10k–50k31 grants · $782k
- $50k–250k64 grants · $7.1M
- $250k+22 grants · $21M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| International Community Foundation | $5,508,501 |
| San Diego Natural History Museum | $4,000,000 |
| University of Minnesota Foundation | $1,150,914 |
| Andale La Paz AC | $1,118,079 |
| International Community Foundation | $1,106,395 |
| International Generosity Foundation Trust | $961,275 |
| Ecology Project International | $729,500 |
| Hopewell Fund | $700,000 |
| The San Diego Foundation | $625,000 |
| US Water Partnership | $528,152 |
| Blue Forest Finance Inc | $500,000 |
| Justice Outside | $500,000 |
| Sociedad de Historia Natural Niparaja | $402,920 |
| Sustainable Northwest | $399,838 |
| International Community Foundation | $375,395 |
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.
Your US giving — 87% of grant dollars ($77M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 13% that went abroad ($12M) is mapped below.
Your human-services grants (FY20–24, $2.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 80% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
Beyond the US — 13% of all-years giving ($12M)
1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 17% of Alumbra Innovations Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +26% since the first grant, against +4% for the ones you funded once.
78 repeat relationships — 59 still active in FY2024, 19 since wound down; 35 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.6M went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- SDSAN DIEGO SOCIETY OF NATURAL HISTORY5× · 2020–2024 · $12M · revenue +62% · 25% of their budget
- SNSUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST5× · 2020–2024 · $3.8M · revenue +94% · 45% of their budget
- BFBLUE FOREST FINANCE INC3× · 2022–2024 · $3.5M · revenue +67% · 28% of their budget
Funded once
DR HOWARD FULLER COLLEGIATE ACADEMY INCgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $1.5M · revenue +66%- CMCHILDREN'S MUSEUM OF NW ARKANSASone grant, 2023 · $500k · revenue -57%
- LCLawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Lawone grant, 2020 · $405k · revenue -56%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Fsc i&p promotes environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world's forests. this mission aligns with the forest stewardship council (fsc), its network of offices, and other organizations.…
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.
The aquarium of the pacific's mission is to instill a sense of wonder, respect, and stewardship for the pacific ocean, its inhabitants, and ecosystems.
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…
Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…
To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.
To improve the efficacy, speed, cost, sustainability, and scaling of conservation solutions through harnessing exponential technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship to prevent human-induced extinction.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The San Diego Foundation and the most unlike its peers is New Heights Christian School. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 28 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.7% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
138 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 138 of the 182 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SAN DIEGO SOCIETY OF NATURAL HISTORY ↗
- Who funds RUSTED GATE FARM ↗
- Who funds SUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST ↗
- Who funds BLUE FOREST FINANCE INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HOPEWELL FUND ↗
- Who funds US WATER PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds OLIVEWOODS GARDENS & LEARNING CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Clean Future Forum Inc ↗
- Who funds DR HOWARD FULLER COLLEGIATE ACADEMY INC ↗
- Who funds THE SAN DIEGO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RESILIENT CITIES CATALYST INC ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE PACIFIC SOUTHWEST ↗
- Who funds ECOLOGY PROJECT INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN NEAR EAST REFUGEE AID ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL GENEROSITY FOUNDATION TRUST ↗
- Who funds TETON SCIENCE SCHOOLS INC ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE OUTSIDE ↗
- Who funds SCHOOL CHOICE WISCONSIN INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S MUSEUM OF NW ARKANSAS ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTE OF THE AMERICAS ↗
- Who funds OCEAN DISCOVERY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law ↗
- Who funds MULTIPLIER ↗
- Who funds THE ALMANOR FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Stronger America Through Seafood Inc ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING FOUNDATION ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Builders Vision Foundation · The Conrad Prebys Foundation · The San Diego Foundation · Walton Family Foundation Inc · Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego · Price Philanthropies Foundation · Community Foundation of Jackson Hole · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · The Parker Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Rancho Santa Fe Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Alumbra Innovations 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.
- Rusted Gate Farm — 100% of income from government
- Mercy Corps — 47% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Coquille Watershed Association — 21% of income from government
- Forth Mobility Fund — 7% of income from government
- Sustainable Northwest — 5% of income from government
- Shelburne Farms — 3% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Alumbra Innovations Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Alumbra Innovations 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.