· Private foundation
Bewley-Motluk Charitable 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k26 grants · $39k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $22k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Center for Domestic Peace | $11,500 |
| Pacific Forest Trust | $10,000 |
| Planned Parenthood of NC | $7,000 |
| UCSF Medical Center | $4,000 |
| Samaritan Neighborhood Center | $3,500 |
| Laytonville Healthy Start | $2,500 |
| Center for Reproductive Rights | $2,500 |
| EOYDC | $2,000 |
| Marin Food Bank | $1,500 |
| PPP3CA Hope Foundation | $1,500 |
| Marin Health Foundation | $1,500 |
| Marin Ventures | $1,500 |
| Climate Central | $1,000 |
| San Francisco Day School | $1,000 |
| Grist Magazine Inc | $1,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $114k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 35% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +66% since the first grant, against +5% for the ones you funded once.
39 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2024, 21 since wound down; 10 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, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k 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
- TPThe Pacific Forest Trust Incorporated7× · 2017–2024 · $67k · revenue +293%
Center for Domestic Peace7× · 2017–2024 · $55k · revenue +79%- OFOKIZU FOUNDATION7× · 2017–2023 · $28k · revenue +100%
Funded once
- UFUCSF Foundation Pediatric Cardiologone grant, 2017 · $10k
- BGBoys Girls Club of SFone grant, 2023 · $5k
- HCHalleck Creek Foundationone grant, 2023 · $5k
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 Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.
The mission of the San Francisco Public Press is to enrich civic life by publishing investigative and solutions journalism that engages diverse audiences and promotes public accountability. The San Francisco Public Press…
The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.
The San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory is dedicated to the conservation of birds and their habitats through science and outreach.
To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.
Bay Nature connects the people of the San Francisco Bay Area to our natural world and motivates people to solve problems with nature in mind. Our vision is that all people have a close relationship with theirnatural world.
Our team of experienced journalists, with the time and resources to dig deep, is committed to meaningfully informing Californians about the players, politics, and interests that shape the issues that affect their lives.
Independent nonpartisan newsroom serving Santa Cruz County, California we are all watching and engaged in our local government, our needs are addressed, democracy works better and our community is stronger.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Adopt a Family of Marin and the most unlike its peers is PPP3CA Hope Foundation. 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 31 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
39 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. 39 of the 65 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 The Pacific Forest Trust Incorporated ↗
- Who funds Center for Domestic Peace ↗
- Who funds Oaks Childrens Center Inc ↗
- Who funds EOYDC - QALICB ↗
- Who funds OKIZU FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds MARIN VENTURES ↗
- Who funds SAMARITAN NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S COMMUNITY CLINIC ↗
- Who funds Point Reyes National Seashore Association ↗
- Who funds Homeward Bound of Marin ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF OAKLAND ↗
- Who funds Mendocino Coast Humane Society ↗
- Who funds ADOPT A FAMILY OF MARIN ↗
- Who funds Vivalon ↗
- Who funds Belvedere Tiburon Library Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds THE ALLIANCE FOR CLIMATE PROTECTION ↗
- Who funds MARIN GENERAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE CENTRAL 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: Marin Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Hobsonlucas Family Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · McNabb Foundation · The Fred Gellert Family Foundation · Leonard & Beryl Buck Foundation · The Lumpkin Family Foundation · Heffernan Group Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · The Thomas Hodge 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 Bewley-Motluk Charitable 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.
- Anthropocene Alliance — 0% 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 Bewley-Motluk Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Bewley-Motluk Charitable 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.