Skip to content
California State Parks Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

California State Parks Foundation

CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS FOUNDATION is an independent, member-supported nonprofit dedicated to protecting and preserving the california state park system for the benefit of all.

$839k
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$313k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Environment$6.6MRecreation & Sports$2.9MYouth Development$305kPublic Safety & Disaster$175kAnimals$45kArts & Culture$35kEducation$18kCommunity Improvement$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 14 grants below total $598,318, the rows itemized in this filing. The $839,174 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $240,856 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $28k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $182k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
  • $250k+1 grant · $313k
$18,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$21M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION$312,713
COMMITTEE FOR CLEAN WATER NATURAL RESOURCES AND PARKS$75,000
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION$48,748
MALIBU CREEK DOCENTS$26,600
CENTRAL COAST STATE PARKS ASSOCIATION$25,000
RANGER FOUNDATION$19,000
LOS ANGELES RIVER STATE PARK PARTNERS$18,000
POINT LOBOS FOUNDATION$15,120
SOUTH YUBA RIVER CITIZEN LEAGUE$15,000
THE SAN LUIS REY MISSION INDIAN FOUNDATION$15,000
CRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY$7,933
GOLD DISCOVERY PARK ASSOCIATION$7,602
REDWOOD PARKS CONSERVANCY$6,894
CHINO HILLS STATE PARK INTERPRETIVE ASSOCIATION$5,708
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:

Its human-services grants (FY19–19, $36k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%POINT BONITA YMCA: $10k → 10%THE BIRD SCHOOL PROJECT: $6k → 13%GIRLVENTURES: $20k → 10%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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$9.0M · 33 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +39% since the first grant, against +22% for those funded once.

33 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 21 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

33
66

Total granted

$9.0M
$1.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+22%

Still filing today

82%
82%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $34k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentRecreation & SportsArts & CultureYouth DevelopmentEducationHuman ServicesOther
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

  • PL
    Point Lobos Foundation
    3× · 2018–2025 · $601k · revenue +39% · 56% of their budget
  • LF
    Literacy for Environmental Justice
    4× · 2019–2022 · $242k · revenue +21%
  • SA
    SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC
    4× · 2017–2023 · $101k · revenue +490%

Funded once

  • CD
    CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION
    one grant, 2017 · $189k
  • RO
    REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT RIVERSIDE
    one grant, 2020 · $61k
  • MR
    MOUNTAINS RECREATION & CONSERVATION AUTHORITY
    one grant, 2017 · $50k
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
Point Reyes National Seashore Association

The Official Partner to the Point Reyes National Seashore Since 1964, Point Reyes National Seashore Association focuses on three priorities: Youth Education & access, environmental conservation and building a broad community for the people…

Environment
2
California Wildlife Foundation

The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species

Animals
3
Nature Collective

Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…

Environment
4
Sonoma Botanical Garden
—
5
Sierra Foothill Conservancy

Protect, manage and preserve lands and wildlife having unique natural resources and cultural qualities within and near the foothills of the sierra nevada range.

Environment
6
Sonoma Mountain Institute
Environment
7
Elkhorn Slough Foundation

The Elkhorn Slough Foundation's mission is to conserve and restore Elkhorn Slough and its watershed, California's largest tidal salt marsh south of San Francisco Bay. Renowned for its extraordinary biodiversity, Elkhorn Slough features a…

Philanthropy
8
The Wildlands Conservancy

The Wildlands Conservancy's dual mission is to preserve the beauty and biodiversity of the earth and to provide programs so that children may know the wonder and joy of nature.

Environment
9
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
10
Parks California

As california state parks' statutory non-profit partner, we have a clear mission - to help strengthen parks and inspire all people to experience these extraordinary places.

Environment
11
Tuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance

At Yosemite Rivers Alliance, we unite conservation and community to protect and restore the three rivers that ?ow through the Yosemite Regionthe Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and Merced.

—
12
Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center Inc

CSERC protects water, wildlife, and wild places of the Northern Yosemite region.

Unclassified
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Coastside State Parks Association; the most unlike its peers is Anahuak Youth Sports Association. 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

83 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 83 of the 101 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
28
Early backer (in before they grew)
83/83
Grantees still filing
60/83
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CANDLESTICK POINT STATE RECR: $5,969,559 · OtherCALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION CANDLESTICK POINT STATE RECRPoint Lobos Foundation: $601,120 · OtherPoint Lobos Foundation+42 more: $1,109,791 · Other+42 moreCOASTSIDE STATE PARKS ASSOCIATION: $884,370 · Arts & CultureCOASTSIDE S…CENTRAL COAST STATE PARKS ASSOCIATION: $35,000 · Arts & Culture+6 more: $68,000 · Arts & Culture+6 moreSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $101,089 · EnvironmentCOMMITTEE FOR CLEAN WATER NATURAL RESOURCES AND PARKS: $100,000 · EnvironmentSonoma Ecology Center: $82,540 · EnvironmentLOS ANGELES AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $50,970 · EnvironmentGOLD DISCOVERY PARK ASSOCIATION: $47,602 · EnvironmentMALIBU CREEK DOCENTS: $46,450 · EnvironmentTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $30,000 · EnvironmentAMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA: $24,000 · Environment+19 more: $236,746 · EnvironmentCRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY: $84,900 · Recreation & SportsLOS ANGELES RIVER STATE PARK PARTNERS: $65,730 · Recreation & SportsFRIENDS OF LAKES FOLSOM AND NATOMA: $54,565 · Recreation & SportsMENDOCINO WOODLANDS CAMP ASSOCIATION: $35,000 · Recreation & SportsCOMMUNITY NATURE CONNECTION: $19,031 · Recreation & SportsFEATHER RIVER CENTER: $12,000 · Recreation & Sports+5 more: $41,129 · Recreation & SportsLiteracy for Environmental Justice: $241,833 · Youth DevelopmentANAHUAK YOUTH SPORTS ASSOCIATION: $20,000 · Youth DevelopmentOUTDOOR OUTREACH: $17,897 · Youth Development+1 more: $8,000 · Youth DevelopmentUniversity of California Merced Foundation: $12,000 · EducationMOVEMENT BRAVE ENTREPRENEUR: $12,000 · EducationSAINT MARY'S COLLEGE OF CALIFORNIA: $10,000 · EducationENVIRONMENTAL CHARTER SCHOOLS: $7,500 · EducationGIRLVENTURES: $20,000 · Human ServicesYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO: $10,000 · Human ServicesBIRD SCHOOL PROJECT: $6,000 · Human Services
Other$7,680,470Arts & Culture$987,370Environment$719,397Recreation & Sports$312,355Youth Development$287,730Education$41,500Human Services$36,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOASTSIDE STATE PARKS ASSOCIATION: $884,370 over 2y, 69% of budgetPoint Lobos Foundation: $601,120 over 3y, 56% of budgetLiteracy for Environmental Justice: $241,833 over 4y, 10% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $101,089 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetCOMMITTEE FOR CLEAN WATER NATURAL RESOURCES AND PARKS: $100,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetCRYSTAL COVE CONSERVANCY: $84,900 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetSonoma Ecology Center: $82,540 over 5y, 1.8% of budgetLOS ANGELES RIVER STATE PARK PARTNERS: $65,730 over 3y, 21% of budgetFRIENDS OF LAKES FOLSOM AND NATOMA: $54,565 over 4y, 9.9% of budgetLOS ANGELES AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $50,970 over 4y, 3.5% of budgetGOLD DISCOVERY PARK ASSOCIATION: $47,602 over 3y, 7.2% of budgetCalifornia Park and Recreation Society: $46,725 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetMALIBU CREEK DOCENTS: $46,450 over 3y, 51% of budgetSOUTH YUBA RIVER CITIZENS LEAGUE: $44,992 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetStewards of the Coast and Redwoods: $40,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetCENTRAL COAST STATE PARKS ASSOCIATION: $35,000 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetMENDOCINO WOODLANDS CAMP ASSOCIATION: $35,000 over 2y, 2.9% of budgetFRIENDS OF SANTA CRUZ STATE PARKS: $32,970 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMOUNTAIN PARKS FOUNDATION OF SANTA CRUZ: $29,450 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetBOOSTERS OF OLD TOWN SAN DIEGO STATE HISTORIC PARK: $25,295 over 3y, 9.7% of budgetAMIGOS DE BOLSA CHICA: $24,000 over 3y, 25% of budgetFriends of China Camp Inc: $23,863 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetREDWOOD PARKS CONSERVANCY: $22,793 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetXERCES SOCIETY INC: $22,416 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetCALIFORNIA WATERFOWL ASSOCIATION: $22,340 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNature Nexus Institute: $20,000 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetGIRLVENTURES: $20,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF SUTTERS FORT INC: $20,000 over 2y, 8.7% of budgetANAHUAK YOUTH SPORTS ASSOCIATION: $20,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetCalifornia Native Plant Society: $19,996 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCOMMUNITY NATURE CONNECTION: $19,031 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetRanger Foundation: $19,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetTHE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC: $18,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetOUTDOOR OUTREACH: $17,897 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetSAN LUIS REY MISSION INDIAN FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 7.5% of budgetFRIENDS OF PERALTA HACIENDA HISTORICAL PARK: $15,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetFEATHER RIVER CENTER: $12,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetUniversity of California Merced Foundation: $12,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMOVEMENT BRAVE ENTREPRENEUR: $12,000 over 1y, 7.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF SAN DIEGO WILDLIFE REFUGES INC: $11,408 over 1y, 24% of budgetANGEL ISLAND CONSERVANCY: $11,000 over 1y, 8.5% of budgetOrange County Coastkeeper: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetGroundwork Richmond Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetDISABLED HIKERS: $10,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetGREEN CITIES FUND INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetSanta Cruz Mountains Trail Stewardship: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetPORTOLA AND CASTLE ROCK FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 12% 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.

Parks CaliforniaResources Legacy FundClif Family FoundationThe Joseph and Vera L…Save the Redwoods Lea…Justice OutsideThe Keith Campbell Fo…The San Francisco Fou…Marin Community Found…Liberty Hill Foundati…National Fish and Wil…Silicon Valley Commun…
Parks CaliforniaCA56.9× affinity25 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Parks California · Resources Legacy Fund · Clif Family Foundation · The Joseph and Vera Long Foundation · Save the Redwoods League · Justice Outside · The Keith Campbell Foundation for the Environment Inc · The San Francisco Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Liberty Hill Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Silicon Valley Community 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 California State Parks Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from California State Parks Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Xerces Society Inc: 22% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
23report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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.

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 101 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 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 California State Parks’ filings →

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 endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home