Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Caners Foundation Endowment for Research and Scholarship

To distribute research grants in the field of horticulture and its related cultural sciences, and fund academic scholarship awards to foster development within the horticultural industry.

$158k
Granted FY2023
4
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$60k
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 FY20172023.

Science & Tech$648kFood & Nutrition$103kCivil Rights$40kAnimals$10k
02FY2023 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 4 grants below total $140,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $157,750 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $17,750 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 · FY2023

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $80k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $60k
$40,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$4.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS$60,000
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE$40,000
UC COOPERATIVE EXTENSION$30,000
CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR$10,000
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 (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 97% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%UC COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SAN MATEO: $24k → 7%UC COOPERATIVE EXTENSION Orange County: $25k → 10%Regents of the UC: $50k → 10%CENTER FOR APPLIED: $13k → 11%UC Riverside: $46k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $92k → 16%Regents of the UC: $44k → 10%Center for Applied Horticultural Research: $9k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE: $42k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $61k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE: $40k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $60k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE: $39k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $40k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE: $38k → 11%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS: $25k → 16%UC Riverside: $33k → 11%CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR: $10k → 16%UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE: $25k → 11%UCNFA: $10k → 16%CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR: $10k → 16%CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR: $10k → 16%CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR: $10k → 16%UC COOPERATIVE EXTENSION: $15k → 16%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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$697k · 5 repeat orgs$104k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
3

Total granted

$697k
$74k

Still filing today

60%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k went to new ones.

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

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

  • TU
    THE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION
    5× · 2019–2023 · $278k · revenue +112%
  • UR
    UC RIVERSIDE FOUNDATION
    7× · 2017–2023 · $263k · revenue +1%
  • RO
    REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
    2× · 2017–2018 · $94k

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS
    one grant, 2018 · $25k
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA- DAVIS
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • UC
    UC COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SAN MATEO
    one grant, 2020 · $24k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field
04the grantee network

3 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. 3 of the 9 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
3/3
Grantees still filing
2/3
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION — $278,000 · EducationTHE UC DAVIS FOUNDATIONUC RIVERSIDE FOUNDATION — $262,911 · EducationUC RIVERSIDE FOUNDATIONREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA — $94,447 · OtherREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFOR…CALIFORNIA CENTER FOR — $40,000 · OtherCALIFORNIA CENTER FORUC COOPERATIVE EXTENSION — $30,000 · OtherUC COOPERATIVE EXTENSIONUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVIS — $25,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA DAVISUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA- DAVIS — $24,954 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA- DAVISUC COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SAN MATEO — $23,930 · OtherUC COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SAN MATEOCENTER FOR APPLIED HORTICULTURAL RESEARCH — $21,382 · OtherCENTER FOR APPLIED HORTICULTURAL RES…
Education$540,911Other$259,713

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 budgetTHE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION — $278,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetUC RIVERSIDE FOUNDATION — $262,911 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetCENTER FOR APPLIED HORTICULTURAL RESEARCH — $21,382 over 2y, 11% 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.

  • Who funds THE UC DAVIS FOUNDATION
  • Who funds UC RIVERSIDE FOUNDATION
  • Who funds CENTER FOR APPLIED HORTICULTURAL RESEARCH

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Caners Foundation Endowment for Research and Scholarship 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.

2025
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Caners Foundation Endowment for Research and Scholarship?

    Find your warmest path to Caners Foundation Endowment for Research and Scholarship through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 9 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $118k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph