· Public charity
California Health Advocates
California Health Advocate (CHA) provides quality medicare and related health care coverage information, education, and policy advocacy
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2020.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 21 grants below total $196,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $241,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $45,000 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 · FY2020
- Under $10k14 grants · $81k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $115k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| California Health Report | $30,000 |
| Council On Aging-Southern Cal | $23,000 |
| Community Partners for CEJC | $20,000 |
| HICAP-Self Help for the Elder | $11,000 |
| Valley Caregiver Resource Cen | $10,500 |
| Legal Services of Northern CA | $10,500 |
| LifeSTEPS | $10,000 |
| California Long Term Care Omb | $9,500 |
| Contra Costa County | $5,500 |
| Kern County Aging & Adult Ser | $5,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,500 |
| PSA 2 HICAP | $5,500 |
| Senior Advocacy Services | $5,500 |
| Dept of Aging & Veterans Ser | $5,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,500 |
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 (FY17–20, $57k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 10% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +171% since the first grant, against +64% for the ones you funded once.
3 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2020, 2 since wound down; 20 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (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 FY2020, 12% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $173k 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
- COCOUNCIL ON AGING - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA4× · 2017–2020 · $46k · revenue +80%
- JIJUSTICE IN AGING2× · 2018–2019 · $28k · revenue +171%
- SSStop Senior Scams Acting Prog2× · 2018–2019 · $16k
Funded once
- CHCalifornia Health Reportone grant, 2020 · $30k
- CPCommunity Partners for CEJCone grant, 2020 · $20k
- HHHICAP-Self Help for the Elderone grant, 2020 · $11k
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.
Free legal services to seniors.
Elder Law & Advocacy (Elder Law) is a nonprofit organization incorporated on December 11, 1978 under the laws of the State of California. Elder Laws mission is to protect seniors by providing legal advice and advocacy. Elder Law serves…
To enhance the quality of life for our aging community by providing services that promote wellbeing and maintain independence.
Legal service for seniors.
Support older persons in their efforts to live safely, independently, non-institutionalized, and with dignity.
Senior Access's mission is to help Marin's older and disabled adults remain independent and part of the community for as long as possible.
California Health Advocate (CHA) provides quality medicare and related health care coverage information, education, and policy advocacy
The mission of Alzheimer's Services of the East Bay is to provide services to individuals with Alzheimer's disease and other related dementia; provide support for their caregivers; and educate and inform the general community about issues…
California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform (CANHR is dedicated to improving the choices, care and quality of life for Californias long -erm care consumers. Through direct advocacy, policy research, education, and litigation it has been…
Assisting seniors with benefits
Lawyers are uniquely qualified to help identify and address legal issues that impede the ability of seniors to remain healthy and independent.
The organization is a multi-service, 501c(3) not-for-profit, social services organization serving seniors throughout los angeles and san bernardio counties, with emphasis on low-income and/or underserved individuals. the organization…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Senior Advocacy Services and the most unlike its peers is Chico State Enterprises. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
11 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. 11 of the 23 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 COUNCIL ON AGING - SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE IN AGING ↗
- Who funds VALLEY CAREGIVER RESOURCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds LEGAL SERVICES OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds LIFE SKILLS TRAINING & EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS INC ↗
- Who funds Senior Advocacy Services ↗
- Who funds LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOR SENIORS ↗
- Who funds Chico State Enterprises ↗
- Who funds Sourcewise ↗
- Who funds SENIOR NETWORK SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds Center for Health Care Rights ↗
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: Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Scan Health Plan · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 California Health Advocates 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.