· Private foundation
CHARITABLE TRUST No 1 UA HERBERT P MCLAUGHLIN 1995 REVOCABLE TRUST
Its FY2021 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 47% of CHARITABLE TRUST No 1 UA HERBERT P MCLAUGHLIN 1995 REVOCABLE TRUST’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2021
- Under $10k3 grants · $11k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $169k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ACCESS INSTITUTE | $35,878 |
| SAN FRANCISCO FREE CLINIC | $35,000 |
| HEADLANDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS | $33,333 |
| ENVISION EDUCATION | $30,000 |
| ACLU | $25,000 |
| PROJECT CREATE | $10,000 |
| Immersive Arts Alliance | $5,000 |
| WORLD MONUMENTS FUND | $5,000 |
| PANUMBRA FOUNDATION | $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 (FY19–20, $20k) 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.
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 +8% since the first grant, against -3% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2021, 2 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (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 FY2021, 57% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $77k 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
- HCHEADLANDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS4× · 2018–2021 · $133k · revenue -11%
- AACLU3× · 2019–2021 · $95k
SAN FRANCISCO FREE CLINIC2× · 2019–2021 · $45k · revenue -26%
Funded once
- SFSAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANKone grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +10%
- CICHOICE IN AGINGgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +159%
- IMIVU MEDone grant, 2019 · $25k
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.
See schedule osfmoma believes the art of our time is vital and shares it with passion and purpose, and that art and the creative process can open minds and help build a better world. for that reason, we assemble unparalleled collections,…
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,…
Ksw makes artists out of community members and community members out of artists. since 1972, ksw has nurtured the creative spirit, and offered an important platform for new voices to be heard -full statement on schedule o
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,…
Nurture empathy and connection by engaging communities with socially relevant contemporary art
The museum's mission is to inspire all californians to create a more vibrant future for themselves and their communities. through collections, exhibitions, education programs, and public dialogue, we inspire people of all ages and…
The lab gives significant funding, time, and space to traditionally underrepresented artists. we seek to transform alongside artistic practices in order to engage meaningfully with visionary communities whose economic and cultural…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Zen Hospice Project Dba Zen Caregiving Project and the most unlike its peers is Penumbra Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
16 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. 16 of the 21 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 HEADLANDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO FREE CLINIC ↗
- Who funds Access Institute for Psychological Services ↗
- Who funds GREENLIGHT CLINIC ↗
- Who funds ENVISION EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds CHOICE IN AGING ↗
- Who funds Larkin Street Youth Services ↗
- Who funds ZEN HOSPICE PROJECT DBA ZEN CAREGIVING PROJECT ↗
- Who funds SHED NYC INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD MONUMENTS FUND INC ↗
- Who funds IMMERSIVE ARTS ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds MUSEUM OF ARTS AND DESIGN ↗
- Who funds A NEW WAY OF LIFE REENTRY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds CHINESE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds PENUMBRA FOUNDATION ↗
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: The San Francisco Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · John Pritzker Family Fund · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 CHARITABLE TRUST No 1 UA HERBERT P MCLAUGHLIN 1995 REVOCABLE TRUST 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.