Skip to content

· Private foundation

Blue Oak Fdn-Dima-Allnz

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.

$295k
Granted FY2024still arriving
19
Grants FY2024still arriving
11
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

International$591kCivil Rights$333kHealth$253kEnvironment$210kEducation$150kHousing & Shelter$108kFood & Nutrition$56kEmployment$50kOther$0
02FY2024 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k17 grants · $240k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$15,000
Median grant
11
States reached
$3.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WINGS$50,000
GLOBAL HEALTH COMMITTEE$25,000
CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS INC$25,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE$20,000
SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY$15,000
WESTERN ENVIRONMENT LAW CENTER$15,000
THE FISTULA FOUNDATION$15,000
IRC - INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE$15,000
THE LITTLE SISTERS FUND INC$15,000
USA FOR UNFPA$15,000
REWILD FKA GLOBAL WILDLIFE CONSERVATION$10,000
DEEP SPRINGS CORPORATION$10,000
ANTIGUA INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION FDN INC$10,000
FUND FOR GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS$10,000
WOMEN'S JUSTICE INITIATIVE$10,000
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 (FY18–22, $22k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION: $8k → 17%WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION: $5k → 17%WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION: $5k → 17%WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION: $2k → 17%WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION: $2k → 17%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

ME
ID
MN
IL
NY
MA
OR
NV
CA
CO
MD
DC
AL
TX
FL
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 5% of Blue Oak Fdn-Dima-Allnz’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Blue Oak Fdn-Dima-Allnzlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 2.6% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.7M · 36 repeat orgs$176k to everyone else

36 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2024, 22 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

36
7

Total granted

$1.7M
$81k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
+132%

Still filing today

81%
14%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $95k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHealthEnvironmentEducationFood & NutritionHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC
    7× · 2018–2024 · $140k · revenue +45%
  • FF
    FUND FOR GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS INC
    7× · 2018–2024 · $110k · revenue +2%
  • WP
    WINGS PROGRAM INC
    2× · 2018–2019 · $85k · revenue +122%

Funded once

  • W(
    WINGS (WOMEN'S INTERN'L NTWK GUATEMALAN
    one grant, 2023 · $50k
  • ZU
    ZAMARANO UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2018 · $10k
  • TA
    THE ADVOCATES FOR SURVIVORS OF
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
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
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
2
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
3
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.

Crime & Legal
4
Human Rights Watch Inc

Human rights watch ("hrw") defends the rights of people worldwide. we scrupulously investigate abuses, expose the facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and secure justice. human rights watch is an independent,…

International
5
Pathfinder International

Pathfinder expands access to sexual and reproductive health services, opening the door to opportunities for women and all individuals to thrive-economically, educationally, and civically. driven by our country-led leadership and local…

International
6
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
7
Technoserve Inc

Technoserve's mission is to fight poverty by helping people build regenerative farms, businesses, and markets that increase incomes.

International
8
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
9
International Development Enterprises

See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.

International
10
Counterpart International Inc

For over 60 years, counterpart international has partnered with communities worldwide to turn local ideas into lasting solutions, connecting local vision with global opportunity. (continued on schedule o)we believe people closest to the…

International
11
Indigenous Peoples Rights Inc

To lead and coordinate the global initiative to address and prevent criminalization, violence, and impunity against indigenous peoples towards strengthening their collectives, solidarity, and actions.

Human Services
12
Namati Inc

Namati, inc. (namati) is dedicated to putting the law in people's hands. we strive to build a just world, in which every one of us can take part in the decisions and demand accountability from the institutions that affect our lives.…

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Medecins Sans Frontieres Usa Inc; the most unlike its peers is National Tuberous Sclerosis Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

34 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. 34 of the 49 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)
33/34
Grantees still filing
23/34
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WINGS (WOMEN'S INTERNATIONAL NETWORK FOR: $150,000 · OtherWINGS (WOMEN'S INTERNATIONAL NETWORK FORTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $90,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYIndividual grant recipient: $60,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientWINGS (WOMEN'S INTERN'L NTWK GUATEMALAN: $50,000 · OtherWINGS (WOMEN'S INTERN'L NTWK GUATEMALANDEEP SPRINGS CORPORATION: $50,000 · OtherDEEP SPRINGS CORPORATIONWINGS: $50,000 · OtherWINGSZAMORANO UNIVERSITY ESCUELA AGRICOLA: $40,000 · OtherWESTERN ENVIRONMENT LAW CENTER: $35,000 · OtherREDWOOD CITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $30,000 · OtherTOMPKINS CONSERVATION: $50,000 · OtherTOMPKINS CONSERVATIONSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $35,000 · Other+20 more: $211,000 · Other+20 moreFUND FOR GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS INC: $110,000 · InternationalFUND FOR GLOBAL HUMA…ALIGHT: $75,000 · InternationalALIGHTInternational Rescue Committee INC: $41,000 · InternationalInternational Rescue…LITTLE SISTERS FUND INC: $40,000 · InternationalLITTLE SISTERS FUND …ANTIGUA INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $40,000 · InternationalANTIGUA INTERNATIONA…MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $28,000 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FRONTI…GRAMEEN FOUNDATION USA: $15,000 · InternationalPLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC: $140,000 · HealthPLANNED PAREN…The Fistula Foundation: $80,000 · HealthThe Fistula F…+2 more: $10,000 · HealthCENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS: $215,000 · Civil RightsCENTER FOR C…WINGS PROGRAM INC: $85,000 · Housing & ShelterHIP Housing Development Corporation: $23,000 · Housing & ShelterGLOBAL HEALTH COMMITTEE INC: $100,000 · Recreation & SportsWomens Justice Initiative Inc: $38,000 · EducationFOUNDATION FOR A COLLEGE EDUCATION: $20,000 · EducationNorthern California Vipassana Center: $7,000 · Education
Other$851,000International$349,000Health$230,000Civil Rights$215,000Housing & Shelter$108,000Recreation & Sports$100,000Education$65,000

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 budgetCENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS: $215,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC: $140,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetFUND FOR GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS INC: $110,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetGLOBAL HEALTH COMMITTEE INC: $100,000 over 7y, 3.3% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $90,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetThe Fistula Foundation: $80,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetALIGHT: $75,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTOMPKINS CONSERVATION: $50,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetDEEP SPRINGS CORPORATION: $50,000 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $41,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetLITTLE SISTERS FUND INC: $40,000 over 2y, 2.1% of budgetANTIGUA INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $40,000 over 4y, 21% of budgetWomens Justice Initiative Inc: $38,000 over 7y, 1.1% of budgetSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $35,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetREDWOOD CITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 4y, 2.9% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $28,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHIP Housing Development Corporation: $23,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetWOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION INC: $22,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetEarth Innovation Institute: $20,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR A COLLEGE EDUCATION: $20,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetKQED INC: $16,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetADVOCATES FOR SURVIVORS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & SEXUAL ASSAULT INC: $15,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetGRAMEEN FOUNDATION USA: $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUSA FOR UNFPA INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF ORANGE COUNTY INC: $11,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDEMOCRACY NOW PRODUCTIONS INC: $9,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetChewonki Foundation Inc: $9,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetADELANTE ALABAMA WORKER CENTER: $8,000 over 4y, 1.4% of budgetNorthern California Vipassana Center: $7,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetBLAINE COUNTY HUNGER COALITION INC: $6,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetHIGH COUNTRY NEWS: $5,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL TUBEROUS SCLEROSIS ASSOCIATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetADVOCATES INC: $5,000 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.

  • Who funds CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE INC ↗
  • Who funds FUND FOR GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS INC ↗
  • Who funds GLOBAL HEALTH COMMITTEE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds WINGS PROGRAM INC ↗
  • Who funds The Fistula Foundation ↗
  • Who funds ALIGHT ↗
  • Who funds TOMPKINS CONSERVATION ↗
  • Who funds DEEP SPRINGS CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
  • Who funds LITTLE SISTERS FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds ANTIGUA INTERNATIONAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Womens Justice Initiative Inc ↗
  • Who funds SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds REDWOOD CITY EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds HIP Housing Development Corporation ↗
  • Who funds WOMEN'S REFUGEE COMMISSION INC ↗
  • Who funds Earth Innovation Institute ↗
  • Who funds FOUNDATION FOR A COLLEGE EDUCATION ↗
  • Who funds KQED INC ↗
  • Who funds ADVOCATES FOR SURVIVORS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE & SEXUAL ASSAULT INC ↗
  • Who funds GRAMEEN FOUNDATION USA ↗
  • Who funds USA FOR UNFPA INC ↗
  • Who funds SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF ORANGE COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds DEMOCRACY NOW PRODUCTIONS INC ↗
  • Who funds Chewonki Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds ADELANTE ALABAMA WORKER CENTER ↗

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.

Gordon E and Betty I Moore FoundationCA13× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund

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 Blue Oak Fdn-Dima-Allnz funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Blue Oak Fdn-Dima-Allnz. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%2%6%14%25%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 66%
  • Advocates Inc: 66% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Blue Oak Fdn-Dima-Allnz?

Find your warmest path to Blue Oak Fdn-Dima-Allnz 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.

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 49 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Blue Oak Fdn-Dima-Allnz’s filings →

More from the funding graph