Skip to content

· Private foundation

Bruce Ronald & Phyllis M Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$22k
Granted FY2025still arriving
5
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Animals$128k
02FY2025 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$414k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SANTA BARBARA HUMANE SOCIETY$5,000
CARE4PAWS$5,000
CHANNEL ISLANDS MARINE & WILDLIFE$5,000
SANTA YNEZ VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY$5,000
THERAPY DOGS OF SANTA BARBARA$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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 92% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%SHADOW'S FUND INCORPORATED: $3k → 14%SANTA BARBARA HUMANE SOCIETY: $5k → 8%SANTA BARBARA HUMANE SOCIETY: $5k → 14%SANTA BARBARA HUMANE SOCIETY: $5k → 14%SANTA BARBARA HUMANE SOCIETY: $4k → 14%ANIMAL SHELTER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: $3k → 14%ANIMAL SHELTER ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: $3k → 14%SANTA MARIA VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $4k → 14%SANTA MARIA VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $4k → 14%SANTA MARIA VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $3k → 14%SANTA YNEZ VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $5k → 14%SANTA YNEZ VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY(DAWG: $5k → 14%SANTA YNEZ VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $5k → 14%SANTA YNEZ VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY(DAWG: $4k → 14%SANTA YNEZ VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY(DAWG: $3k → 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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$120k · 8 repeat orgs$8k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
1

Total granted

$120k
$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+77%
+168%

Still filing today

75%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

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

  • CI
    CARE4Paws Inc
    7× · 2019–2025 · $30k · revenue +281%
  • SB
    SANTA BARBARA HUMANE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
    4× · 2022–2025 · $19k · revenue +77%
  • AS
    Animal Shelter Assistance Program
    4× · 2019–2023 · $16k · revenue +130%

Funded once

  • SF
    SHADOWS FUND INCORPORATEDgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $3k · revenue +168%
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
Santa Cruz Humane Society Inc

To provide a no kill shelter for homeless pets and promote adoption to good homes.

Animals
2
Santa Barbara County Animal Care Foundation Inc

To provide better care for animals in santa barbara county shelters.

Animals
3
High Sierra Animal Rescue Inc

High Sierra Animal Rescues mission is to save the lives of homeless dogs in the regions served. Our staff and volunteers are dedicated to making our communities better through successful adoptions advancing their welfare and creating human…

Animals
4
North Bay Animal Services
Animals
5
California Animal Rescue and Education Sanctuary Inc

C.A.R.E.S.MISSION STATEMENT*Rescue, foster and find good homes for abandoned and homeless domestic and farm animals.*Spay/neuter abandoned and homeless cats and dogs, as well as help low income families with same.*Conduct TNR+ programs to…

—
6
The Adoptable Dog
Animals
7
Raskels Rescue
Animals
8
Spca San Pat County

The goal of the SPCA San Pat County is to maintain an animal shelter that serves the needs of the county. It serves the county and communities within that county by providing a shelter where people can adopt a homeless pet and as long as…

Animals
9
Paws and Claws Animal Shelter
Animals
10
South Pacific County Humane Society

Our mission is to improve the lives of cats and dogs by providing compassionate care, finding homes for homeless animals, and supporting pets and pet owners in need. We accomplish this mission by taking cats and dogs that do not have a…

Animals
11
Saving Saluda Strays
Animals
12
Humane Society of the Sierra Foothills

To prevent animal abuse and neglect, enforce the anti-cruelty laws of the State of California and promote the wellbeing of animals.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Santa Maria Valley Humane Society; the most unlike its peers is Therapy Dogs of Santa Barbara 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

8 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. 8 of the 10 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CARE4Paws Inc: $29,625 · AnimalsCARE4Paws IncSANTA BARBARA HUMANE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $19,375 · AnimalsSANTA BARBARA HUMANE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALSAnimal Shelter Assistance Program: $15,625 · AnimalsAnimal Shelter Assistance ProgramTHERAPY DOGS OF SANTA BARBARA INC: $11,375 · AnimalsTHERAPY DOGS OF SANTA BARBARA INCK-9 PLACEMENT AND ASSISTANCE LEAGUE INC: $10,250 · AnimalsK-9 PLACEMENT AND ASSISTANCE LEAGUE INCSANTA YNEZ VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $10,000 · AnimalsSANTA YNEZ VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY+1 more: $3,000 · AnimalsSANTA YNEZ VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY(DAWG: $12,250 · OtherSANTA YNEZ VALLEY HUMANE …SANTA MARIA VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $11,250 · OtherSANTA MARIA VALLEY HUMANE…CHANNEL ISLANDS MARINE & WILDLIFE: $5,000 · OtherCHANNEL ISLANDS MARINE & …
Animals$99,250Other$28,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCARE4Paws Inc: $29,625 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetSANTA BARBARA HUMANE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $19,375 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetAnimal Shelter Assistance Program: $15,625 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetTHERAPY DOGS OF SANTA BARBARA INC: $11,375 over 3y, 3.7% of budgetSANTA MARIA VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $11,250 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetK-9 PLACEMENT AND ASSISTANCE LEAGUE INC: $10,250 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetSANTA YNEZ VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY: $10,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetSHADOWS FUND INCORPORATED: $3,000 over 1y, 0.9% 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.

Santa Barbara FoundationCA21.8× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Santa Barbara Foundation · Animal Charitable Foundation Santa Barbara County Inc · The Wood-Claeyssens Foundation · Thornton S Jr and Katrina D Glide Foundation · Resqcats Inc · Chrissie's Fund a Delaware Trust · Balin Hildegard Charit Tua-Main · Ethel Frends Charitable Foundation · Bragg Health Foundation · Walter J & Holly O Thomson Charitable · Roy and Ida Eagle Foundation · Hutton Foundation Dba Hutton Parker Foundation

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 Bruce Ronald & Phyllis M Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Bruce Ronald & Phyllis M Trust. 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 Bruce Ronald & Phyllis M Trust?

    Find your warmest path to Bruce Ronald & Phyllis M Trust 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 10 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Bruce Ronald & Phyllis M’s filings →

    More from the funding graph