Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

Caldera Foundation

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.

$511k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
0182% classified

What you funded, over time

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

Environment$1.2MPublic Benefit$450kInternational$426kScience & Tech$295kPhilanthropy$202kHuman Services$110kEducation$105kArts & Culture$80kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $1k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $60k
  • $50k–250k8 grants · $450k
$50,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$10M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PLOUGHSHARES FUND$100,000
CLEAN ENERGY COMMUNITIES FUND$50,000
Individual grant recipient$50,000
CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER$50,000
AMALGAMATED CHARITABLE FOUNDATION$50,000
ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE$50,000
PACIFIC INSTITUTE$50,000
ISSUE ONE$50,000
THE GOOD INFORMATION FOUNDATION$35,000
AMERICAN INDEPENDENT FOUNDATION$25,000
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH$1,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 80% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTIST: $50k → 8%STANDFORD UNIVERSITY: $70k → 8%PROJECT DRAWDOWN: $100k → 8%OCCIDENTAL ARTS ECOLOGY: $30k → 9%PACIFIC INSTITUTE: $50k → 10%CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCE: $35k → 10%CAL MATTERS: $45k → 12%TELOS GROUP: $70k → 14%ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE: $178k → 7%CLIMATE CENTRAL: $35k → 11%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTIST: $50k → 8%STANDFORD UNIVERSITY: $35k → 8%PROJECT DRAWDOWN: $50k → 8%OCCIDENTAL ARTS ECOLOGY: $30k → 9%PACIFIC INSTITUTE: $35k → 10%PROJECT DRAWDOWN: $30k → 10%TPW: $50k → 12%ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE: $50k → 7%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTIST: $50k → 8%PROJECT DRAWDOWN: $50k → 8%THE GOOD INFORMATION FOUNDATION: $35k → 17%ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE: $50k → 7%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTIST: $35k → 8%NATIONAL CENTER FOR SCIENCE EDUCATI: $50k → 10%THE COMMONWEALTH CLUB: $30k → 10%CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER: $100k → 14%ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE: $50k → 7%PARTNERSHIP FOR CHANGE: $30k → 10%CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER: $50k → 14%ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE: $50k → 7%CLEAN ENERGY COMMUNITIES FUND: $50k → 10%ISSUE ONE: $50k → 14%CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER: $50k → 14%FORWARD GLOBALTPW: $50k → 10%CLIMATE REALTY: $35k → 14%PLOUGHSHARES FUND: $150k → 10%PLOUGHSHARES FUND: $100k → 10%NEW VENTURE FUND: $40k → 14%PLOUGHSHARES FUND: $50k → 10%ISLAND PRESS: $35k → 14%PLOUGHSHARES FUND: $50k → 10%FOUNDATION OF NATIONAL PROGRESS: $35k → 10%INDIVISIBLE CIVICS ENGAGEMENT: $100k → 10%INDIVISIBLE CIVICS ENGAGEMENT: $50k → 10%AMALGAMATED CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSECLC: $50k → 10%CLIMATE ONE: $35k → 10%CLIMATE ONE: $35k → 10%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.

Which US states your grants reach

MT
MI
NY
MA
IN
NJ
CA
CO
KY
NC
DC

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.

04

Where the work is directed

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

About 6% of Caldera Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 51% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 48% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Caldera Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 3.9% directed abroad (not shown)

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.3M · 16 repeat orgs$1.0M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +209% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.

16 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
33

Total granted

$2.3M
$942k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+209%
0%

Still filing today

69%
55%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $76k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’23’24’25
EnvironmentInternationalPublic BenefitScience & TechEducationCivil RightsOther

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

  • Rocky Mountain Institute
    5× · 2017–2025 · $378k · revenue +381%
  • PD
    PROJECT DRAWDOWN
    4× · 2017–2020 · $230k · revenue +612%
  • THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC
    4× · 2017–2024 · $185k · revenue +12%

Funded once

  • TG
    Telos Group Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $70k · revenue 0%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2024 · $50k
  • NC
    National Center for Science Education
    one grant, 2024 · $50k · revenue 0%

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 Breakthrough Institute

The Breakthrough Institute is a research center that identifies and promotes technological solutions to environmental and human development challenges.

Environment
2
Third Way

To research and develop centrist policy ideas.

Civil Rights
3
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
4
Advocates for Climate Innovation
Philanthropy
5
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
6
Climate Institute

The climate institute is organized for the purpose of educating the general public and policy makers as to the gravity of potential climate change, exploring the policy implications of the latest scientific findings on climate modelling…

Environment
7
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
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
Partnership for Global Security

The partnership for global security (pgs) is a recognized international leader and innovator in nuclear and transnational security policy developing actionable responses to 21st century security challenges by engaging international,…

International
10
Pew Research Center

Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan "fact tank" that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. Pew Research Center generates a foundation of facts that enriches the public dialogue and…

Social Science
11
The Alliance for Just Deliberation On Solar Geoengineering Inc

The alliance for just deliberation on solar geoengineering (dsg) is a charitable, scientific and educational organization dedicated to building just and inclusive deliberation about research and potential use of solar geoengineering. solar…

Environment
12
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc and the most unlike its peers is Pacific Institute. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyGovernment Accountability R…Christian Missionary Organi…Land Conservation Organizat…Faith-Based Liberal Arts Co…Environmental Advocacy Orga…
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 30 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%6%<5yr15%6%5–10yr20%29%10–20yr17%21%20–35yr11%29%35–55yr13%9%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%3%<5yr15%3%5–10yr20%20%10–20yr17%28%20–35yr11%43%35–55yr13%3%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/37
the rest of the field
14%
26,003/186,941

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

37 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. 37 of the 57 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
36/37
Grantees still filing
21/37
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Rocky Mountain Institute — $378,000 · OtherRocky Mountain InstituteIndividual grant recipient — $220,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientThe Pacific Forest Trust Incorporated — $100,000 · OtherThe Pacific Forest Trust IncorporatedPACIFIC INSTITUTE — $100,000 · OtherPACIFIC INSTITUTEIndividual grant recipient — $70,000 · Other+29 more — $927,000 · Other+29 morePLOUGHSHARES FUND INC — $350,000 · InternationalPLOUGHSHARES FUND I…THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC — $185,000 · InternationalTHE UNION OF CONCER…Telos Group Inc — $70,000 · InternationalTelos Group Inc+2 more — $6,000 · InternationalPROJECT DRAWDOWN — $230,000 · EducationPROJECT DR…THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY — $105,000 · EducationTHE BOARD …+1 more — $10,000 · EducationOccidental Arts and Ecology Center — $60,000 · EnvironmentISLAND PRESS — $58,000 · EnvironmentNEW VENTURE FUND — $40,000 · EnvironmentClean Energy For America Inc — $25,000 · EnvironmentGOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY — $25,000 · EnvironmentVote Solar — $25,000 · EnvironmentSustainable Conservation — $25,000 · EnvironmentADVENTURERS AND SCIENTISTS FOR CONSERVATION — $20,000 · EnvironmentTHE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC — $200,000 · Crime & LegalISSUE ONE — $130,000 · Public BenefitThe Center for Investigative Reporting formrly Foundation for National Progress — $35,000 · Public BenefitTRUMAN CENTER FOR NATIONAL POLICY — $30,000 · Public BenefitCLIMATE CENTRAL INC — $110,000 · Science & TechNational Center for Science Education — $50,000 · Science & TechNATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES — $25,000 · Science & Tech
Other$1,795,000International$611,000Education$345,000Environment$278,000Crime & Legal$200,000Public Benefit$195,000Science & Tech$185,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetRocky Mountain Institute — $378,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetPLOUGHSHARES FUND INC — $350,000 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetPROJECT DRAWDOWN — $230,000 over 4y, 8.6% of budgetTHE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC — $200,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC — $185,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetISSUE ONE — $130,000 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetCLIMATE CENTRAL INC — $110,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY — $105,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetThe Pacific Forest Trust Incorporated — $100,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetPACIFIC INSTITUTE — $100,000 over 3y, 36% of budgetTelos Group Inc — $70,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetOccidental Arts and Ecology Center — $60,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetISLAND PRESS — $58,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetTHE GOOD INFORMATION FOUNDATION — $55,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetNational Center for Science Education — $50,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND — $50,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCalMatters — $45,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND — $40,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES — $35,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Center for Investigative Reporting formrly Foundation for National Progress — $35,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTRUMAN CENTER FOR NATIONAL POLICY — $30,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetPartnerships For Change — $30,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetNATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetClean Energy For America Inc — $25,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY — $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVote Solar — $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSustainable Conservation — $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetADVENTURERS AND SCIENTISTS FOR CONSERVATION — $20,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetAmerican Resilience Project Inc — $15,000 over 1y, 14% of budgetTHE PHILANTHROPY WORKSHOP INC DBA FORWARD GLOBAL — $12,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetAUBURN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSUNRISE MOVEMENT — $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE ASIA SOCIETY — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC — $1,000 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.

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 Fou…The William & Flora H…Silicon Valley Commun…Gordon E and Betty I …National Philanthropi…ImpactassetsincVanguard Charitable E…American Endowment Fo…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The San Francisco FoundationCA16.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The San Francisco Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Impactassetsinc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Caldera Foundation 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
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%your share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25

    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 57 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

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines