· Public charity
California Access to Justice Commission
The California Access to Justice Commission advances access to justice for all Californians by expanding resources, removing barriers, and developing innovations so everyone can effectively and efficiently resolve their civil legal issues.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 101 grants below total $6,093,750 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $6,448,321 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $354,571 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
- $10k–50k61 grants · $1.8M
- $50k–250k39 grants · $3.9M
- $250k+1 grant · $350k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CA Collab for Immigrant Just | $350,000 |
| CLSEPA | $186,250 |
| Immigration Inst of Bay Area | $183,250 |
| Mixteco Indigena Com Org Prj | $172,000 |
| Immigrant Legal Defense QBO | $169,000 |
| Asian Americans Advancing Jus | $159,500 |
| Latin Advoc Network-Latinan | $158,500 |
| Legal Services for Children | $157,500 |
| Immigration Project Inc | $152,500 |
| Inland Counties Legal Srv Inc | $151,000 |
| Pship for the Adv of New Amcn | $148,750 |
| Loyola Marymount University | $128,000 |
| Thai Community Dvlpmnt Ctr | $125,000 |
| California Indian Legal Srvcs | $118,500 |
| National Center for Youth Law | $117,500 |
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 (FY22–25, $1.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 73% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +27% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
72 repeat relationships — 47 still active in FY2025, 25 since wound down; 52 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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, 51% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.0M 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
- CCCALIFORNIA COLLABORATIVE FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE4× · 2022–2025 · $700k · revenue +27%
- NLNeighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County2× · 2022–2023 · $400k · revenue +27%
- PLPUBLIC LAW CENTER3× · 2022–2025 · $344k · revenue +2%
Funded once
- VOVARIOUS OTHER GRANTSone grant, 2024 · $2.6M
- NLNIHONMACHI LEGAL OUTREACH DBA ASIAN PACIFIC ISLANDER LEGAL OUTREACHone grant, 2024 · $25k · revenue 0%
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.
The California Center for Movement Legal Services (Movement Legal) provides legal services in the pursuit of improving the lives of California's traditionally underserved residents, carrying out legal work that fosters community led policy…
The Law Foundation uses the law as a tool for change. The Law Foundation addresses problems linked to social injustices like poverty, discrimination, child abuse, and neglect. Every day, our attorneys, social workers, and advocates craft…
The Asian Law Caucus's mission is to promote, advance, and represent the legal and civil rights of Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities, recognizing that social, economic, political and racial inequalities continue to exist…
The Equal Justice Center is a non-profit law firm and employment justice organization which empowers low-income families, workers, and communities to achieve fair treatment in the workplace, in the justice system, and in our shared society…
To provide equal access to justice and due process to indigent immigrants facing removal proceedings.
To provide civil legal services to low-income individuals and to promote equal access to the justice system through advocacy, legal counseling, innovative self-help services, in depth legal representation, community education, and economic…
The California Lawyers Foundation shares a common mission with the California Lawyers Association of promoting excellence, diversity, and inclusion in the legal profession and fairness in the administration of justice and the rule of law.…
The legal aid justice center partners with communities and clients to achieve justice by dismantling systems that create and perpetuate poverty.
Immigrant legal services of the central coast (ilscc) provides immigration-related legal services and information to the immigrant community of the central coast region of california, primarily santa cruz, san benito, and monterey…
The Legal Aid Association of California, the statewide membership of legal services nonprofits, serves its members through advocacy and other support in efforts to provide legal assistance to low-income Californians and ensure access to…
CIVIL LIBERTIES DEFENSE CENTER (CLDC) educates the general public about their rights and privileges under the US Constitution and provides free legal support to climate and social justice activists.
The center for human rights and constitutional law (chrcl) is a nonprofit organization that advances and protects the rights of immigrants and communities impacted by systems of oppression through training and support, advocacy, and impact…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is East Bay Community Law Center and the most unlike its peers is International Rescue Committee Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 36 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
122 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. 122 of the 126 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 CALIFORNIA COLLABORATIVE FOR IMMIGRANT JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds CENTRO LEGAL DE LA RAZA ↗
- Who funds Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County ↗
- Who funds Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto Inc ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds Inner City Law Center ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR CHILDREN'S RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds THAI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
- Who funds COALITION TO ABOLISH SLAVERY & TRAFFICKING ↗
- Who funds CENTRAL CALIFORNIA LEGAL SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds Legal Access Alameda ↗
- Who funds OPEN DOOR LEGAL ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES CENTER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area ↗
- Who funds ELDER LAW & ADVOCACY ↗
- Who funds OneJustice ↗
- Who funds Immigration Project Inc ↗
- Who funds National Center for Youth Law ↗
- Who funds ROOT & REBOUND ↗
- Who funds Legal Aid at Work ↗
- Who funds PARTNERSHIP FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF NEW AMERICANS ↗
- Who funds California Indian Legal Services Inc ↗
- Who funds Inland Counties Legal Services ↗
- Who funds Public Interest Law Project ↗
- Who funds MISSION ACTION INC ↗
- Who funds SAN LUIS OBISPO LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Counsel for Justice ↗
- Who funds Center For Gender And Refugee Studies- California Inc ↗
- Who funds California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation ↗
- Who funds Oasis Legal Services ↗
- Who funds THE TRANSLATIN COALITION ↗
- Who funds AL OTRO LADO ↗
- Who funds Legal Assistance to the Elderly ↗
- Who funds SECURE FAMILIES COLLABORATIVE ↗
- Who funds IMMIGRATION INSTITUTE OF THE BAY AREA ↗
- Who funds EAST BAY SANCTUARY COVENANT ↗
- Who funds KIND INC ↗
- Who funds SENIOR CITIZENS LEGAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds HARRIETT BUHAI CENTER FOR FAMILY LAW ↗
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: California Changelawyers · Equal Justice Works · The California Endowment · Immigrant Legal Resource Center · The San Francisco Foundation · The Morrison & Foerster Foundation · Catholic Legal Immigration Network Inc · The California Wellness Foundation · Weingart Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · The Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals
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 California Access to Justice Commission 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.