Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Bigglesworth Family Foundation Inc

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.

$1.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$1.8M
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Bigglesworth Family Foundation Inc’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

1
17
3
18
3
19
3
20
0
21
0
22
1
23
0
24
1
25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What you fund
0183% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Philanthropy$11MCrime & Legal$141kHealth$9kCivil Rights$8kPublic Safety & Disaster$6kEducation$3kYouth Development$500Human Services$120Other$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $8k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.8M
$6,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$16M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Fidelity Charitable Gift Fund$1,750,000
World Central Kitchen$6,000
Face to Face Sonoma Aids$1,500
Individual grant recipient$500
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY18–18, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Naral Pro Choice America: $8k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

62%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$271k · 3 repeat orgs$163k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +109% since the first grant, against -11% for the ones you funded once.

3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
12

Total granted

$271k
$157k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+109%
-11%

Still filing today

33%
58%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 19% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
PhilanthropyHuman ServicesCrime & LegalInternationalCivil RightsCommunity ImprovementOther

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

  • Northern California Grantmakers
    3× · 2018–2020 · $255k · revenue +109%
  • FT
    Face to Face Sonoma Aids
    3× · 2022–2025 · $9k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    5× · 2017–2021 · $7k

Funded once

  • LA
    Legal Aid Association
    one grant, 2022 · $125k
  • RF
    REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALLgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $8k · revenue +28%
  • JD
    Justice Diversity Center of SF
    one grant, 2017 · $5k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
The Bar Association of San Francisco

The bar association of san francisco champions equal access to justice and promotes humanity, excellence, and diversity in the legal profession. we provide legal services to disadvantaged and underserved individuals in san francisco. we…

2
Equal Justice Society

The Equal Justice Society (EJS) is transforming the nations consciousness on racethrough law, social science, and the arts. EJS works to dismantle structural andinstitutional racism to advance robust equal protection under the Fourteenth…

Civil Rights
3
Golden Gate University

Golden gate university prepares individuals to lead and serve by providing high quality, practice-based educational programs in law, taxation, business and related professions - as a nonprofit institution - in an innovative and challenging…

Education
4
Justice Funders

Serve as a partner, educator, and guide for philanthropy in reimagining practices that advance a thriving and just world.

5
Law Foundation of Silicon Valley

The Law Foundation uses the law as a tool for change. The Law Foundation addresses problems linked to social injustices like poverty, discrimination, child abuse, and neglect. Every day, our attorneys, social workers, and advocates craft…

Crime & Legal
6
Legal Advocates for Safe Science and Technology Inc

Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.

Science & Tech
7
Jobs with Justice San Francisco

A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…

Employment
8
Fund for Justice

Fund for Justice is a nationally connected social impact research and advocacy organization that works to achieve fundamental, systemic reform by addressing policies and practicies that prevent individuals from reaching their full…

Crime & Legal
9
Equal Justice America Inc

Equal justice america provides grants to legal aid and civil rights organizations serving low-income and disadvantaged people by funding fellowships for law students and early-career lawyers.

Crime & Legal
10
Ffwd

FFWD accelerates the growth of technology nonprofits by providing financial and human capital to help scale technology solutions for education, environmental, health, and human rights issues.

Philanthropy
11
Silicon Schools Fund Inc

The mission of the silicon schools fund is to improve education through supporting the launch of excellent new schools, improving academic instruction in existing schools, and by funding some of the boldest innovations in education…

Education
12
California Changelawyers

To build a better justice system for all californians.

Social Science

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Equal Justice Works and the most unlike its peers is Gg Professionals 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

10 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 18 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND — $10,925,000 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND+1 more — $500 · Community ImprovementNorthern California Grantmakers — $255,332 · Philanthropy+2 more — $5,000 · PhilanthropyLegal Aid Association — $125,000 · OtherFace to Face Sonoma Aids — $8,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $7,000 · Other+6 more — $14,598 · OtherREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL — $7,500 · Human ServicesWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC — $6,000 · InternationalEQUAL JUSTICE WORKS — $2,500 · Crime & LegalGG PROFESSIONALS INC — $2,000 · Civil Rights
Community Improvement$10,925,500Philanthropy$260,332Other$155,098Human Services$7,500International$6,000Crime & Legal$2,500Civil Rights$2,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND — $10,925,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetNorthern California Grantmakers — $255,332 over 3y, 4.1% of budgetREPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL — $7,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOneJustice — $4,278 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE BATTERY FOUNDATION — $4,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE WORKS — $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBALIF FOUNDATION — $1,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetSILICON VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATION — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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 FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND
  • Who funds Northern California Grantmakers
  • Who funds REPRODUCTIVE FREEDOM FOR ALL
  • Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC
  • Who funds OneJustice
  • Who funds THE BATTERY FOUNDATION
  • Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE WORKS
  • Who funds GG PROFESSIONALS INC
  • Who funds BALIF FOUNDATION
  • Who funds SILICON VALLEY EDUCATION 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.

The San Francisco FoundationCA13× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The San Francisco Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Bigglesworth Family Foundation Inc 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 18 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph