Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

California Pacific Medical Center Foundation

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS.

$28M
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$26M
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172024.

Health$174MInternational$25kCommunity Improvement$25kHuman Services$6k
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k1 grant · $80k
  • $250k+4 grants · $28M
$339,236
Median grant
1
States reached
$539M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SUTTER BAY HOSPITALS$26,246,673
SUTTER BAY MEDICAL FOUNDATION$639,466
Sutter Health$339,236
Pacific Vision Foundation$309,880
PATIENT ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION$80,272
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:

Your human-services grants (FY17–19, $83k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%CATHOLIC CHARITIES CYO OF THE ARCHDIOCESE: $6k → 10%SUTTER VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION & HOSPICE: $35k → 12%SUTTER VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION & HOSPICE: $26k → 12%SUTTER VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION & HOSPICE: $17k → 12%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.

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.

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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$170M · 7 repeat orgs$3.4M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +47% since the first grant, against +26% for the ones you funded once.

7 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
6

Total granted

$170M
$3.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+47%
+26%

Still filing today

100%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyOther

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

  • SB
    SUTTER BAY HOSPITALS
    8× · 2017–2024 · $159M · revenue +84%
  • SB
    SUTTER BAY MEDICAL FOUNDATION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $8.2M · revenue +73%
  • SH
    SUTTER HEALTH
    3× · 2020–2024 · $933k · revenue +41%

Funded once

  • LS
    LUCILE SALTER PACKARD CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL AT STANFORDgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $1.9M · revenue +26%
  • SW
    SUTTER WEST BAY MEDICAL FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $1.4M
  • IS
    INQUIRING SYSTEMS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +213%

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
Sutter Valley Hospitals

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
2
Sutter Valley Medical Foundation

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: Caring for our patients first and our people always. VISION: To be the most comprehensive, integrated and connected health system for getting and staying well. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
3
Scripps Health

Founded in 1924 by philanthropist Ellen Browning Scripps, Scripps Health is a $4.9 billion, private not-for-profit integrated health system in San Diego, Ca. (see Sch O)

Health
4
California Pacific Medical Center Foundation

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
5
Sutter Coast Hospital

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
6
Sutter East Bay Medical Foundation

The mission of sutter east bay medical foundation is to enhance the health and well-being of people in the communities we serve through compassion and excellence. form 990, part iii, line 3 sutter east bay medical foundation merged into…

7
John Muir Health

The mission of john muir is to improve the health of the communities we serve with quality and compassion.

Health
8
Ucsf Health Community Hospitals Fka Saint Francis Memorial Hospital

Ucsf health community hospital's mission statement is caring, healing, teaching, and discovering.

Health
9
Sutter Medical Center Foundation

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
10
Southern California University of Health Sciences

The mission of southern california university of health sciences (scu) is to educate students as competent, caring and successful practitioners of integrative healthcare. the university is committed to providing excellence in academics,…

Education
11
Memorial Hospital Foundation

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

12
Sutter East Bay Hospitals

Mission statement: sutter east bay hospital's (sebh) mission is to enhance the well-being of people in the communities we serve through a not-for-profit commitment to compassion and excellence in health care services. form 990, part iii,…

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sutter West Bay Medical Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Inquiring Systems 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

12 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 13 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

SUTTER BAY HOSPITALS — $158,557,075 · HealthSUTTER BAY HOSPITALSSUTTER BAY MEDICAL FOUNDATION — $8,164,431 · Health+5 more — $5,315,357 · HealthSUTTER WEST BAY MEDICAL FOUNDATION — $1,438,886 · Other+1 more — $10,000 · OtherSUTTER VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION AND HOSPICE — $77,439 · Human ServicesCATHOLIC CHARITIES CYO OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SAN FRANCISCO — $6,000 · Human ServicesINQUIRING SYSTEMS INC — $25,000 · Community ImprovementTIPPING POINT COMMUNITY — $25,000 · Philanthropy
Health$172,036,863Other$1,448,886Human Services$83,439Community Improvement$25,000Philanthropy$25,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetSUTTER BAY HOSPITALS — $158,557,075 over 8y, 0.6% of budgetSUTTER BAY MEDICAL FOUNDATION — $8,164,431 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetLUCILE SALTER PACKARD CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL AT STANFORD — $1,893,517 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPACIFIC VISION FOUNDATION — $1,689,301 over 7y, 18% of budgetSUTTER WEST BAY MEDICAL FOUNDATION — $1,438,886 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetSUTTER HEALTH — $932,592 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetPATIENT ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION — $712,447 over 8y, 22% of budgetEND WELL FOUNDATION — $87,500 over 3y, 5.7% of budgetSUTTER VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION AND HOSPICE — $77,439 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetINQUIRING SYSTEMS INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTIPPING POINT COMMUNITY — $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES CYO OF THE ARCHDIOCESE OF SAN FRANCISCO — $6,000 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.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO7.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Pacific Medical Center 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%your share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%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 · 0–25%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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 13 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph