· Private foundation
Charitable Trust 2 Under the Herbert P McLaughlin Rev Trust Uad 2/21/95
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k32 grants · $33k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $110k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SOCIAL GOOD FUND | $25,000 |
| PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE | $25,000 |
| GOOD FUND | $25,000 |
| ENVISION EDUCATION | $15,000 |
| ACLU FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND | $10,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $6,000 |
| CAMFED | $3,000 |
| GREATER WASHINGTON COMM FON | $3,000 |
| CHRONICLE SEASON OF SHARING | $2,500 |
| FIDF | $2,500 |
| SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION | $1,500 |
| MAVEN PROJECT | $1,500 |
| HARVARD UNIVERSITY | $1,000 |
| SF FOOD BANK | $1,000 |
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 (FY18–24, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +33% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
43 repeat relationships — 27 still active in FY2024, 16 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33k 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
- EEENVISION EDUCATION INC6× · 2019–2024 · $197k · revenue +24%
- SPSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC5× · 2019–2023 · $41k · revenue +28%
PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION4× · 2020–2023 · $41k · revenue +33%
Funded once
PEER HEALTH EXCHANGE INCone grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue -24%- OPONE PURPOSE SCHOOL INCone grant, 2018 · $7k · revenue -99%
- CICHILDREN IN THE WILDERNESSone grant, 2023 · $5k
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 open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.
Golden gate university prepares individuals to lead and serve by providing high quality, practice-based educational programs in law, taxation, business and related professions - as a nonprofit institution - in an innovative and challenging…
The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
See attached statementprimary missionfuture 500 builds trust between corporations, advocates, investors, and philanthropists to advance business as a force for good. we are experts in stakeholder engagement with over 25 years of experience…
The asian art museum celebrates, preserves, and promotes asian and asian american art and cultures for local and global audiences. we provide a dynamic forum for exchanging ideas, inviting collaboration, and fueling imagination to deepen…
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
The bar association of san francisco champions equal access to justice and promotes humanity, excellence, and diversity in the legal profession. we provide legal services to disadvantaged and underserved individuals in san francisco. we…
The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Camfed Usa Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Alpine Humane Society. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 1% 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.
54 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. 54 of the 86 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 President and Fellows of Harvard College ↗
- Who funds ENVISION EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds PEER HEALTH EXCHANGE INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds CAMFED USA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds VOTEORG ↗
- Who funds THE MAVEN PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Sustainable Conservation ↗
- Who funds CHRONICLE SEASON OF SHARING FUND ↗
- Who funds ONE PURPOSE SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds AIM HIGH ↗
- Who funds PENINSULA BRIDGE EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DWIGHT HALL AT YALE ↗
- Who funds THE CLEAR FUND ↗
- Who funds Civic Nation ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO MUSEUM OF MODERN ART ↗
- Who funds CITY ARTS & LECTURES INC ↗
- Who funds TIPPING POINT COMMUNITY ↗
- Who funds Larkin Street Youth Services ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE ISRAEL DEFENSE FORCES ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO JAZZ ORGANIZATION ↗
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: Marin Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Mary a Crocker Trust · Swig Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Tides Foundation · The James Irvine Foundation · The California Wellness Foundation · American Endowment 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 Charitable Trust 2 Under the Herbert P McLaughlin Rev Trust Uad 2/21/95 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.
- The Maranyundo Initiative Inc — 85% of income from government
- President and Fellows of Harvard College — 7% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% of income from government
- Oxfam-America Inc — 0% of income from government
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.