· Public charity
Boys and Girls Club of Santa Monica Inc
To inspire and enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as caring, responsible, productive citizens.
What you funded, over time
Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2023–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 11 grants below total $2,043,129 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,507,458 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $464,329 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- $50k–250k8 grants · $1.3M
- $250k+3 grants · $777k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF CARSON | $267,638 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF LA HARBOR | $258,115 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF METRO LOS ANGELES | $250,961 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF METRO LA | $227,521 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF WEST SAN GABRIEL VALLEY | $218,413 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF BURBANK INC | $195,961 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF PASADENA | $173,094 |
| LOS ANGELES BOYS & GIRLS CLUB | $167,651 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF LONG BEACH | $156,551 |
| RAND CORPORATION | $71,016 |
| CALIFORNIA ALLIANCE OF BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS | $56,208 |
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 (FY23–23, $188k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 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.
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.
10 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- BGBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF LONG BEACH3× · 2023–2025 · $569k · revenue +20%
- BGBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CARSON INC3× · 2023–2025 · $553k · revenue +25%
- TBTHE BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF BURBANK AND GREATER EAST VALLEY INC3× · 2023–2025 · $553k · revenue +48%
Funded once
- SJST JOSEPH CENTERone grant, 2023 · $188k · revenue +24%
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.
Enable young people, especially those from disadvantaged circumstances to realize their full potential as productive, responsible & caring citizens.
Boys and girls clubs provide a safe place for youth to develop character, leadership, education, career guidance, health, art, sports and fitness while becoming responsible and caring citizens.
To inspire and enable all young people, especially those most in need of our services, to realize and develop their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens in a global society.
To provide activities and experiences that enrich the lives of young people, inspiring and enabling them to reach their full potential.
To inspire and enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as caring, responsible, productive citizens.
To inspire and enable all young people to reach their full potential as caring, productive, and responsible citizens.
To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring and responsible citizens.
The club provides a safe environment for children in the santa barbara area to develop self-esteem, values and skills.
To inspire and enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens
To enable and inspire all young people, ages five to eighteen, especially those who need us most, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible, and caring citizens.
To inspire and enable all young people to realize their full potential as productive, caring and responsible citizens.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Boys & Girls Clubs of Metro Los Angeles and the most unlike its peers is The Rand Corporation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
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 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 11 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 BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF METRO LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF LONG BEACH ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CARSON INC ↗
- Who funds THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF BURBANK AND GREATER EAST VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES BOYS & GIRLS CLUB ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF PASADENA ↗
- Who funds Boys & Girls Club of West San Gabriel Valley ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF LOS ANGELES HARBOR ↗
- Who funds The Rand Corporation ↗
- Who funds ST JOSEPH CENTER ↗
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: Boys & Girls Clubs of America · California Community Foundation · The Los Angeles County Alliance for Boys and Girls Clubs · The Green Foundation · The Rose Hills Foundation · Elbridge Stuart Foundation Dba Stuart Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · Los Angeles Lakers Youth Foundation · La84 Foundation · United Way Inc · The Ahmanson Foundation · Good360
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 Boys and Girls Club of Santa Monica 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.
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.