Skip to content
Bastoni-Evans Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Bastoni-Evans 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.

$56k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Animals$259kArts & Culture$2kYouth Development$1kHuman Services$750Health$250Environment$100Other$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $21k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $35k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$324k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SAN FRANCISCO SPCA$25,000
HUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY$10,000
MUTTVILLE$7,500
THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER$5,000
WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY$5,000
FURREVER CAT AND KITTEN RESCUE$1,000
ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND$600
THE BIRD RESCUE CENTER OF SONOMA COUNTY$500
PET LIFELINE$500
SAN FRANCISCO ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL$500
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 45% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%VESTED IN K9'S INC: $750 → 11%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $10k → 10%PET ASSISTED WELLNESS (PAWS) PROGRAM: $1k → 7%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SILICON VALLEY: $1k → 8%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $5k → 8%THE BIRD RESCUE CENTER OF SONOMA COUNTY: $500 → 9%SAN FRANCISCO SPCA: $25k → 10%FURREVER CAT AND KITTEN RESCUE: $1k → 13%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $10k → 10%PET ASSISTED WELLNESS (PAWS) PROGRAM: $1k → 7%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $5k → 8%SAN FRANCISCO SPCA: $25k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $5k → 10%PET ASSISTED WELLNESS (PAWS) PROGRAM: $1k → 7%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $5k → 8%SAN FRANCISCO SPCA: $10k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $5k → 10%PET ASSISTED WELLNESS (PAWS) PROGRAM: $1k → 7%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $3k → 8%SAN FRANCISCO SPCA: $10k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $5k → 10%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $3k → 8%SAN FRANCISCO SPCA: $10k → 10%WILDLIFE CONSERVATION SOCIETY: $5k → 10%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $1k → 8%SAN FRANCISCO SPCA: $8k → 10%INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE (IFAW): $4k → 14%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $1k → 8%MUTTVILLE: $8k → 10%INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE (IFAW): $1k → 14%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $1k → 8%MUTTVILLE: $3k → 10%THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $1k → 8%MUTTVILLE: $1k → 10%FRIENDS OF SF ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL: $1k → 10%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY: $10k → 9%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY: $10k → 9%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY: $10k → 9%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY: $10k → 9%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY: $5k → 9%SONOMA HUMANE SOCIETY: $5k → 9%PAWS: $1k → 10%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY: $5k → 9%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY: $5k → 9%ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND: $600 → 9%ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND: $600 → 9%ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND: $600 → 9%ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND: $600 → 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

MT
IL
MA
CA
UT
WV
DC
TX
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$255k · 19 repeat orgs$9k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +59% since the first grant, against +47% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
18

Total granted

$255k
$8k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+59%
+47%

Still filing today

79%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHealthEnvironmentOther
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

  • TS
    THE SAN FRANCISCO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
    6× · 2020–2025 · $88k · revenue +28%
  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY
    8× · 2017–2025 · $60k · revenue +0%
  • WC
    Wildlife Conservation Society
    6× · 2020–2025 · $40k · revenue +57%

Funded once

  • FO
    FRIENDS OF SF ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL
    one grant, 2021 · $1k
  • P
    PAWS
    one grant, 2017 · $1k
  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEY
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue +14%
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
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
2
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
3
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

The aspca's mission, as stated by founder henry bergh in 1866, is "to provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the united states." the aspca was founded on the belief that animals are entitled to kind and…

Animals
4
J-Lo's Animal Rescue & Sanctuary in

Animal care and rescue

Animals
5
Pom and the Hound Animal Refuge

Animal Welfare

—
6
Animal Humane Society

Animal Humane Society (AHS) established in 1878 and incorporated as a nonprofit charitable organization in 1891 works to engage the hearts, hands, and minds of the community to help animals. AHS's vision is to compassionately and…

Animals
7
Humane Society of Southern Arizona

To compassionately serve pets and the people who love them.

Animals
8
North Bay Animal Services
Animals
9
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
10
Saving Saluda Strays
Animals
11
Beaverhead Animal Shelter

The mission is to protect and care for homeless animals in the Dillon and Beaverhead county area.

Animals
12
Animal Humane Society Veterinary Centers Pc

Provide wellness and spay/neuter services at reduced cost for people in need.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Peninsula Humane Society & Spca; the most unlike its peers is Wildlife Conservation Society. 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

27 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. 27 of the 38 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)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/27
Grantees still filing
22/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE SAN FRANCISCO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $88,300 · AnimalsTHE SAN FRANCISCO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALSHUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY: $60,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTYWildlife Conservation Society: $40,000 · AnimalsWildlife Conservation SocietyTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $24,200 · AnimalsTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTERMUTTVILLE: $13,500 · AnimalsMUTTVILLE+19 more: $22,300 · Animals+19 morePET ASSISTED WELLNESS (PAWS) PROGRAM: $4,500 · OtherANIMAL RESCUE FOUNDATION (ARF): $1,950 · OtherFAIRE: $1,500 · OtherSAN FRANCISCO ANIMAL CARE & CONTROL: $1,500 · OtherFRIENDS OF SF ANIMAL CARE AND CONTROL: $1,000 · OtherFURREVER CAT AND KITTEN RESCUE: $1,000 · OtherPAWS: $1,000 · OtherVESTED IN K9'S INC: $750 · Other+4 more: $1,200 · OtherPhysicians Committee for Responsible Med: $250 · HealthWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $100 · Environment
Animals$248,300Other$14,400Health$250Environment$100

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 budgetTHE SAN FRANCISCO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $88,300 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF SONOMA COUNTY: $60,000 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society: $40,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetTHE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $24,200 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetMUTTVILLE: $13,500 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $5,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC: $3,900 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetPets Lifeline Inc: $2,550 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BIRD RESCUE CENTER: $2,400 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetHumane World for Animals Inc: $1,100 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY: $900 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPets In Need: $850 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetLilys Legacy Senior Dog Sanctuary: $750 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE MILO FOUNDATION: $650 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPENINSULA HUMANE SOCIETY & SPCA: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWILDCARE: $450 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHOUSTON HUMANE SOCIETY: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN ANTONIO (AUDIT): $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL ANTI-VIVISECTION SOCIETY: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL HUMANE EDUCATION SOCIETY: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBerkeley East Bay Humane Society Inc dba Berkeley Humane: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN HUMANE ASSOCIATION: $150 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $100 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.

Thornton S Jr and Kat…McNabb FoundationPetsmart Charities IncMarin Community Found…McKesson Foundation I…Thelma Doelger Trust …The American Society …The Duffield Family F…Gordon E and Betty I …Greater Good CharitiesBright Funds Foundati…Heffernan Group Found…
Thornton S Jr and Katrina D Glide FoundationCA19.8× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Thornton S Jr and Katrina D Glide Foundation · McNabb Foundation · Petsmart Charities Inc · Marin Community Foundation · McKesson Foundation Inc · Thelma Doelger Trust for Animals · The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals · The Duffield Family Foundation Dba Maddie's Fund · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · Greater Good Charities · Bright Funds Foundation · Heffernan Group 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 Bastoni-Evans Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bastoni-Evans 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%4%8%11%15%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 · 0–15%
    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 38 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 Bastoni-Evans’ 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