Skip to content
Blits Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Blits Foundation

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$28k
Granted FY2026still arriving
5
Grants FY2026still arriving
1
States reached
$18k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Food & Nutrition$90kReligion$36kYouth Development$28kEducation$16kEnvironment$10kArts & Culture$7kHealth$6kHuman Services$5kOther$0
02FY2026 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2026

  • Under $10k4 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $18k
$2,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$588k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CANTICLE FARM$18,000
ZEN CAREGIVING PROJECT$4,000
LIVING DYING PROJECT$2,000
SAN FRANCISCO ZEN CENTER$2,000
SPIRIT ROCK MEDITATION CENTER$2,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–17, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SOUTH ASIAN HELPLINE AND REFERRAL AGENCY (SAHARA): $5k → 14%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.
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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$190k · 9 repeat orgs$40k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2026, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
8

Total granted

$190k
$40k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
+14%

Still filing today

56%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
Food & NutritionYouth DevelopmentEducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureReligionOther
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

  • CF
    Canticle Farm
    6× · 2021–2026 · $108k · revenue -41%
  • GI
    GIRLS INCORPORATED OF ORANGE COUNTY
    2× · 2017–2018 · $20k · revenue +80%
  • TC
    THE CHAPLAINCY INSTITUTE
    2× · 2019–2020 · $15k

Funded once

  • CF
    CALIFORNIA FILM INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2019 · $7k · revenue -2%
  • I
    INTERPLAY
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
  • BD
    Beyond Differences
    one grant, 2019 · $5k · revenue -25%
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
California Institute of Contemporary Art
—
2
Trauma Informed La
Civil Rights
3
Oakland Museum of California

The museum's mission is to inspire all californians to create a more vibrant future for themselves and their communities. through collections, exhibitions, education programs, and public dialogue, we inspire people of all ages and…

Arts & Culture
4
Commonweal

Engage in educational, charitable and research activities which contribute to the health of individuals, to public health and to the health of the global environment.

Human Services
5
Artronika

ARTRONIKA is a collective of Los Angeles based artists that produce immersive arts programming showcasing an array of South Asian talent and culture. Through innovative and inclusive events, we reimagine traditional music, art, and…

—
6
Orange County Asian and Pacific Islander Community Alliance Inc

Ocapica's mission is to build a healthier and stronger community by enhancing the well-being of asians and pacific islanders through inclusive partnerships in the areas of service, education, advocacy, organizing, and research.

Health
7
Kala Art Institute

Kala Art Institute's mission is to help artists sustain their creative work over time through its Artist-in-Residence and Fellowship Programs, and to engage the community through exhibitions, public programs and education.

Arts & Culture
8
Tao of Tomorrow

Nonprofit empowering leadership, culture

Public Benefit
9
Lead Liberated

Through coaching and group facilitation, leaders of color heal from racism, develop skills to identify & interrupt racism in personal leadership, organizational practices & policies, and produce antiracist solutions in partnership with…

Education
10
Contemporary Art Review Los Angeles

Contemporary Art Review Los Angeles (Carla) is a Los Angeles-based nonprofit organization and publishing platform that is dedicated to providing inclusive perspectives on contemporary art. Publishing in both print and online, Carla is an…

Arts & Culture
11
California Institute of Integral Studies

Ciis is an institution of higher education that encourages an interdisciplinary approach to learning. over 1,700 students are enrolled in masters, doctoral, bachelor of arts completion programs, and certifications. ours is a mosaic of…

Education
12
Oakland Digital Arts and Literacy Center Inc

BRIDGEGOOD increases opportunity and digital literacy for under-resourced students with a focus on Black Indigenous and Women People of Color. We prepare first-generation college students for careers in UX UI and Visual Design while…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Orange County Community Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Canticle Farm. 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

11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 18 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
6/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Canticle Farm: $108,000 · Food & NutritionCanticle FarmGIRLS INCORPORATED OF ORANGE COUNTY: $20,349 · OtherGIRLS INCORPORATED OF ORANGE COUNTYTHE CHAPLAINCY INSTITUTE: $15,000 · OtherTHE CHAPLAINCY INSTITUTESPIRIT ROCK MEDITATION CENTER: $12,750 · OtherSPIRIT ROCK MEDITATION CENTERSAN FRANCISCO ZEN CENTER: $11,750 · OtherSAN FRANCISCO ZEN CENTERLIVINGDYING PROJECT: $6,000 · OtherLIVINGDYING PROJECTZEN HOSPICE PROJECT DBA ZEN CAREGIVING PROJECT: $5,500 · OtherZEN HOSPICE PROJECT DBA ZEN CAREGIVING PROJEC…INTERPLAY: $5,000 · OtherBeyond Differences: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · Other+1 more: $2,500 · OtherORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL OF THE ARTS: $8,300 · EducationCALIFORNIA FILM INSTITUTE: $7,000 · Arts & CultureGLIDE FOUNDATION: $5,000 · ReligionSouth Asian Helpline and Referral Agency: $5,000 · Human ServicesYOUTH SPIRIT ARTWORKS: $3,000 · Youth DevelopmentORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,600 · Philanthropy
Food & Nutrition$108,000Other$93,849Education$8,300Arts & Culture$7,000Religion$5,000Human Services$5,000Youth Development$3,000Philanthropy$2,600

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCanticle Farm: $108,000 over 6y, 3.4% of budgetGIRLS INCORPORATED OF ORANGE COUNTY: $20,349 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL OF THE ARTS: $8,300 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA FILM INSTITUTE: $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLIVINGDYING PROJECT: $6,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetBeyond Differences: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSouth Asian Helpline and Referral Agency: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetYOUTH SPIRIT ARTWORKS: $3,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,600 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.

Silicon Valley Commun…The San Francisco Fou…Jewish Community Fede…Robert K & Barbara J …Jonathan & Kathleen A…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…Marin Community Found…ImpactassetsincGs Donor Advised Phil…Charities Aid Foundat…National Philanthropi…
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA16.7× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Robert K & Barbara J Straus Family Foundation Inc · Jonathan & Kathleen Altman Fndtn · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Marin Community Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · National Philanthropic Trust

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 Blits Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Blits 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%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 18 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Blits’ 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