· Private foundation
Berkshire 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k8 grants · $200k
- $50k–250k14 grants · $1.2M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| INTERIM INC | $150,000 |
| CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS | $150,000 |
| ONE ACRE FUND | $100,000 |
| MONTEREY SYMPHONY | $100,000 |
| CARMEL BACH FESTIVAL | $100,000 |
| HUALALAI FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| MEARTH | $100,000 |
| THE FOOD BANK | $75,000 |
| BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF MONTEREY COUNTY | $50,000 |
| PACIFIC REPERATORY THEATRE | $50,000 |
| THE FILM FORUM | $50,000 |
| LUDLOW INSTITUTE | $50,000 |
| CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION- PALISADES | $50,000 |
| FOUNDATION FOR CSUMB | $50,000 |
| MARIN ART & GARDEN CENTER | $40,000 |
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 human-services grants (FY18–24, $200k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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
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.
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 +18% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
25 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 87% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $175k 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
- IIINTERIM INC9× · 2017–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +123%
THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC9× · 2017–2025 · $1.1M · revenue +69%- MMEARTH9× · 2017–2025 · $775k · revenue +9%
Funded once
- FOFriends of Mission Trail Nature Preservegraduatedone grant, 2022 · $75k · revenue +88%
- FFFOUNDATION FOR THE HOMELESS INCone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue +7%
- CFCENTER FOR INDEPENDENT THOUGHTone grant, 2024 · $50k · revenue 0%
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.
MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…
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…
Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…
To ensure coast redwood forests in the santa cruz mountains thrive for generations to come. since 1900, sempervirens has protected more than 36,000 acres. learn more about our mission, vision, and strategic plan through 2030 at:…
Mission statement: mission: caring for our patients first and our people always. vision: to be the most comprehensive, integrated and connected health system for getting and staying well. values: excellence - we deliver high-quality,…
Create and publish educational materials, conduct professional development, promote awareness, and sponsor research on the spectacular biological diversity of the State of CA.
Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…
The organization protects and enhances the local environment through education, advocacy and legal action.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is California State Parks Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Ludlow Institute. 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 41 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
37 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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 37 of the 52 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 INTERIM INC ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds MEARTH ↗
- Who funds ONE ACRE FUND ↗
- Who funds Carmel Bach Festival Inc ↗
- Who funds MONTEREY COUNTY SYMPHONY ASSOC INC ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC REPERTORY THEATRE ↗
- Who funds Boys & Girls Clubs of Monterey County ↗
- Who funds Christian Herald Association Inc ↗
- Who funds GATHERING FOR WOMEN - MONTEREY ↗
- Who funds Marin Art and Garden Center ↗
- Who funds FILM FORUM INC ↗
- Who funds Friends of Mission Trail Nature Preserve ↗
- Who funds CANAL ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR THE HOMELESS INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT THOUGHT ↗
- Who funds Ludlow Institute ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Bay Area Ridge Trail Council ↗
- Who funds GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Elkhorn Slough Foundation ↗
- Who funds LIFEMOVES ↗
- Who funds CARMEL HIGH SCHOOL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MONTAGE HEALTH ↗
- Who funds Point Lobos Foundation ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HUMAN SERVICES ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds STEP UP ON SECOND STREET INC ↗
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: Barnet Segal Charitable Trust · Monterey Peninsula Foundation · Pebble Beach Company Foundation · Alexander F Victor Foundation · Nancy Buck Ransom Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · The Frank and Judith Marshall Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Tyler Foundation · William McCaskey Chapman and Adaline Dinsmore Chapman Foundation · Arts Council for Monterey County · Community Hospital of the Monterey Peninsula
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 Berkshire 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.
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.