Skip to content
Clif Family Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Clif Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$24M
Granted FY2024still arriving
459
Grants FY2024still arriving
48
States reached
$3.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Environment$14MFood & Nutrition$12MHealth$5.4MCommunity Improvement$3.8MPublic Benefit$3.5MEducation$3.0MRecreation & Sports$3.0MArts & Culture$2.4MOther$0
02FY2024 · 459 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k61 grants · $163k
  • $10k–50k311 grants · $6.5M
  • $50k–250k69 grants · $9.2M
  • $250k+18 grants · $8.2M
$20,000
Median grant
48
States reached
$571M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
County of Napa$3,000,000
Social & Environmental Entrepreneurs$625,000
State Power Fund dba We Make The Future$400,000
The Chisholm Legacy Project$350,000
Fair Food Network$310,000
Coalition of Immokalee Workers$300,000
Greater Kansas Community Foundation$300,000
Regenerative Agriculture Foundation$300,000
NDN Collective Inc$300,000
Union of Concerned Scientists$300,000
Community Partners$300,000
Movement Strategy Center$250,000
Taproot Earth$250,000
Leadership Counsel for Justice & Account$250,000
Greenlining Institute$250,000
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 (FY17–24, $1.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 81% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Hidden Harvest Corp: $10k → 11%CAL FIRE Benevolent Foundation: $25k → 12%Family Services of Tulare County: $10k → 18%Columbia County Sanctuary Movement: $20k → 11%Neighborhood House of Milwaukee: $20k → 17%ADELANTE MUJERES: $50k → 8%Social Enterprise Trust: $35k → 11%Repurpose Savannah: $25k → 16%Northwest Association For Blind Athletes: $15k → 9%Ethos Farm Project: $25k → 4%Growing Places Garden Project: $10k → 11%Winter Wildlands Alliance: $15k → 8%Family Services of Tulare County: $10k → 18%Columbia County Sanctuary Movement: $20k → 11%ADELANTE MUJERES: $25k → 8%Emergent Structures Inc: $12k → 16%Winter Wildlands Alliance: $15k → 8%BEYOND EMANCIPATION: $20k → 10%Equitable Food Initiative: $150k → 14%Children's Literacy Network: $10k → 14%WINTER WILDLANDS ALLIANCE: $7k → 8%UpValley Family Center: $20k → 9%Multicultural Refugee Coalition: $20k → 10%Paradox Sports: $15k → 12%SO ALL MAY EAT INC: $25k → 12%Propeller: $35k → 23%Multicultural Refugee Coalition: $12k → 10%SO ALL MAY EAT INC: $25k → 12%Social Entrepreneurs of New Orleans: $35k → 23%Solutions for Change: $38k → 11%Solutions for Change: $10k → 11%SO ALL MAY EAT INC: $10k → 12%Urban Strategies Inc: $10k → 11%UpValley Family Center: $10k → 9%SO ALL MAY EAT INC: $10k → 12%The Honeycomb Project: $25k → 14%The Honeycomb Project: $25k → 14%The Honeycomb Project: $10k → 14%Forget Me Not Childrens Services: $30k → 9%FORGET ME NOT CHILDRENS SERVICES: $10k → 9%FORGET ME NOT CHILDRENS SERVICES: $10k → 9%Women's Wilderness Institute: $25k → 12%FORGET ME NOT CHILDRENS SERVICES: $10k → 9%Women's Wilderness Institute: $25k → 12%reDiscover Center: $20k → 14%The Tides Center: $250k → 10%The Tides Center: $25k → 10%reDiscover Center: $15k → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

AK
ME
VT
NH
WA
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
OR
NV
WY
SD
IA
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
RI
CA
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
DE
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
HI
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
TX
FL
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.

68%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$38M · 811 repeat orgs$18M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +63% since the first grant, against +24% for those funded once.

811 repeat relationships: 326 still active in FY2024, 485 since wound down; 126 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

811
383

Total granted

$38M
$5.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+63%
+24%

Still filing today

81%
54%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 47% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13M 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
EnvironmentFood & NutritionEducationHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • BC
    BREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS
    8× · 2017–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +25%
  • SA
    SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC
    5× · 2018–2024 · $650k · revenue +326%
  • CE
    CHICKEN & EGG FILMS INC
    2× · 2023–2024 · $600k · revenue +68%

Funded once

  • NV
    Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition
    one grant, 2023 · $1.3M · revenue -27% · 74% of their budget
  • SM
    ST MARYS HEALTH WAGON INC
    one grant, 2023 · $300k · revenue 0%
  • RI
    Rodale Institutegraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $240k · revenue +46%
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
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
2
Development in Gardening

Development in Gardening is improving the nutrition and livelihoods of some of the world's most uniquely marginalized people by teaching them to plant regenerative gardens that grow health, wealth, and a sense of belonging.

Community Improvement
3
Boulder Watershed Collective

The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…

Environment
4
A Greener World

A Greener World empowers sustainable solutions in agriculture, promoting and supporting real-life farming models to the public and offering farmers and ranchers practical guidance, resources and support on achieving truly sustainable…

Food & Nutrition
5
Food Action

Our mission is to educate, organize and advocate for food and farming systems to become economically prosperous, ecologically sound and socially equitable.

—
6
Rescape California

ReScape addresses climate change by providing a regenerative, nature-based whole systems foundation for landscaping education, workforce development and policy.Foundational to our work is a whole systems watershed framework that…

Environment
7
Oregon Agricultural Trust

Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.

Environment
8
Global Forest Generation

Global Forest Generation restores and protects forest ecosystems in partnership with grassroots leaders and local communities across vast landscapes which play a critical role in preserving water, protecting biodiversity, storing carbon,…

Environment
9
Green Foothills Foundation dba Green Foothills

Our mission is to protect local nature and farmland to ensure a healthy environment for everyone.

—
10
New Roots Institute

New Roots Institute is a nonprofit empowering the next generation with knowledge and training to end factory farming.

Food & Nutrition
11
Climate Foundation

To research and develop healthy climate solutions comprising global food security, ecosystem regeneration and carbon balance in seas and soils.

Science & Tech
12
Earthcorps

To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc; the most unlike its peers is Napa County Seed Library. 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

987 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. 987 of the 1,332 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.

9
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
418
Early backer (in before they grew)
955/987
Grantees still filing
695/987
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COUNTY OF NAPA: $3,000,000 · OtherCOUNTY OF NAPALuna Kids Dance Inc dba Luna Dance Institute Luna Dance & Creativity: $1,305,000 · OtherLuna Kids Dance Inc dba Luna Dance Institute Luna Dance &…SCHOLARSHIP AMERICA: $658,246 · OtherCHICKEN & EGG FILMS INC: $600,000 · Other+93 more: $12,278,869 · Other+93 moreNapa Valley Vine Trail Coalition: $1,300,000 · EnvironmentNapa Valley Vine T…SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $650,000 · EnvironmentSOCIAL AND ENVIRON…Pesticide Action Network North America: $260,000 · EnvironmentTaproot Earth: $250,000 · EnvironmentInternational Living Future Institute: $225,000 · EnvironmentCLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE: $200,000 · EnvironmentINSTITUTE FOR MARKET TRANSFORMATION: $200,000 · EnvironmentTHE CLEO INSTITUTE INC: $200,000 · EnvironmentCOMING CLEAN INC: $200,000 · EnvironmentSAGE FOUNDATION INC: $200,000 · Environment+24 more: $2,065,750 · Environment+24 moreFAIR FOOD NETWORK INC: $407,000 · Food & NutritionFAIR FOOD …REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE FOUNDATION: $300,000 · Food & NutritionREGENERATI…Rodale Institute: $240,000 · Food & NutritionRodale Ins…Farmworker Association of Florida Inc: $167,500 · Food & NutritionFOOD RECOVERY NETWORK INC: $163,000 · Food & NutritionFAIR FOOD STANDARDS COUNCIL INC: $150,000 · Food & NutritionORGANIC SOUP KITCHEN: $112,000 · Food & Nutrition+22 more: $1,727,300 · Food & Nutrition+22 moreCOMMUNITY PARTNERS: $305,000 · Community ImprovementNDN COLLECTIVE INC: $300,000 · Community ImprovementINSTITUTE FOR LOCAL SELF RELIANCE: $280,000 · Community ImprovementMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER: $272,500 · Community ImprovementINQUIRING SYSTEMS INC: $253,000 · Community ImprovementTHE GREENLINING INSTITUTE: $250,000 · Community ImprovementBLACK FARMER FUND INC: $225,000 · Community ImprovementRACE FORWARD: $200,000 · Community ImprovementINNOVATION NETWORK FOR COMMUNITIES INC: $175,000 · Community ImprovementAPPALACHIAN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: $166,000 · Community ImprovementSUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST: $150,000 · Community Improvement+1 more: $67,500 · Community ImprovementBREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS: $1,370,000 · HealthST MARYS HEALTH WAGON INC: $300,000 · HealthGREEN & HEALTHY HOMES INITIATIVE INC: $175,000 · HealthMIGRANT CLINICIANS NETWORK INC: $160,000 · HealthSAJE: $150,000 · HealthSt Helena Hospital Foundation: $105,000 · HealthGreensprings Learning Community: $950,000 · EducationSustainable Economies Law Center: $200,000 · EducationThe Climate Center: $190,000 · EducationCHEF ANN FOUNDATION: $152,600 · EducationCornell University: $120,000 · EducationCIVICS UNPLUGGED INC: $115,000 · EducationROCKING THE BOAT INC: $105,000 · EducationCommunity Resources for Science: $95,000 · Education+2 more: $133,000 · EducationTIDES CENTER: $292,310 · Human ServicesAlianza Nacional de Campesinas Inc: $200,000 · Human ServicesEquitable Food Initiative: $150,000 · Human ServicesTHE CERES COMMUNITY PROJECT: $107,500 · Human ServicesSO ALL MAY EAT INC: $94,500 · Human ServicesSOCIAL ENTREPRENEURS OF NEW ORLEANS: $89,000 · Human ServicesTHE HONEYCOMB PROJECT INC NFP: $85,000 · Human ServicesADELANTE MUJERES: $84,000 · Human ServicesForget Me Not Childrens Services: $75,000 · Human ServicesSOLUTIONS FOR CHANGE INC: $73,500 · Human ServicesWOMEN'S WILDERNESS INSTITUTE: $63,500 · Human ServicesTHE REFUGEE COLLECTIVE: $61,000 · Human Services
Other$17,842,115Environment$5,750,750Food & Nutrition$3,266,800Community Improvement$2,644,000Health$2,260,000Education$2,060,600Human Services$1,375,310

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS: $1,370,000 over 8y, 11% of budgetLuna Kids Dance Inc dba Luna Dance Institute Luna Dance & Creativity: $1,305,000 over 7y, 53% of budgetNapa Valley Vine Trail Coalition: $1,300,000 over 1y, 74% of budgetGreensprings Learning Community: $950,000 over 2y, 90% of budgetSOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENTREPRENEURS (SEE) INC: $650,000 over 5y, 0.7% of budgetCHICKEN & EGG FILMS INC: $600,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetFAIR FOOD NETWORK INC: $407,000 over 7y, 2.3% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $405,000 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetNATIONAL INTERSCHOLASTIC CYCLING ASSOCIATION: $400,000 over 7y, 1.6% of budgetTHE CHISHOLM LEGACY PROJECT INC: $350,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetCOMMUNITY PARTNERS: $305,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetNDN COLLECTIVE INC: $300,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetThe Coalition of Immokalee Workers Inc: $300,000 over 1y, 7.4% of budgetST MARYS HEALTH WAGON INC: $300,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetREGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE FOUNDATION: $300,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $292,310 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR LOCAL SELF RELIANCE: $280,000 over 8y, 2.1% of budgetMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER: $272,500 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetPesticide Action Network North America: $260,000 over 8y, 9.5% of budgetINQUIRING SYSTEMS INC: $253,000 over 5y, 1.4% of budgetCENTER FOR RURAL AFFAIRS: $250,000 over 6y, 1.5% of budgetLEADERSHIP COUNSEL FOR JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY: $250,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetTHE HACK FOUNDATION D/B/A HACK CLUB: $250,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTHE GREENLINING INSTITUTE: $250,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetTaproot Earth: $250,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetFARMWORKER JUSTICE FUND INC: $247,000 over 3y, 9.5% of budgetRodale Institute: $240,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetHABITABLE: $230,000 over 8y, 3.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES: $228,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetBLACK FARMER FUND INC: $225,000 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetInternational Living Future Institute: $225,000 over 2y, 3.0% of budgetOrganizacion en California de Lideres Campesinas Inc: $200,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetSustainable Economies Law Center: $200,000 over 5y, 2.8% of budgetCLIMATE JUSTICE ALLIANCE: $200,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR MARKET TRANSFORMATION: $200,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetAmalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc: $200,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CLEO INSTITUTE INC: $200,000 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetCOMING CLEAN INC: $200,000 over 1y, 7.0% of budgetSAGE FOUNDATION INC: $200,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetAlianza Nacional de Campesinas Inc: $200,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetRACE FORWARD: $200,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetFIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE: $200,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetEmerald Cities Collaborative Inc: $200,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetThe Climate Center: $190,000 over 4y, 4.8% of budgetGREEN & HEALTHY HOMES INITIATIVE INC: $175,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetINNOVATION NETWORK FOR COMMUNITIES INC: $175,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetORGANIC FARMING RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $175,000 over 8y, 2.8% of budgetRURAL ADVANCEMENT FOUNDATION INTERNATION: $175,000 over 7y, 1.5% 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.

PatagoniaorgUNFI FoundationThe Schmidt Family Fo…Farm Aid IncResources Legacy FundThe Joseph and Vera L…Rsf Social Finance IncThe Rose Foundation f…Mary a Crocker TrustNatural Resources Def…Rei Cooperative Actio…The Marisla Foundation
PatagoniaorgCA125× affinity236 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · UNFI Foundation · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Farm Aid Inc · Resources Legacy Fund · The Joseph and Vera Long Foundation · Rsf Social Finance Inc · The Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment · Mary a Crocker Trust · Natural Resources Defense Council Inc · Rei Cooperative Action Fund · The Marisla 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 Clif Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Clif Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 160%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Green & Healthy Homes Initiative Inc: 100% of income from government
  • Rogue Farm Corps: 91% of income from government
  • Future Harvest Inc: 41% of income from government
  • New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance: 39% of income from government
  • Adelante Mujeres: 31% of income from government
  • Xerces Society Inc: 22% of income from government
  • The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc: 16% of income from government
  • Intervale Center Inc: 13% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
  • Sustainable Northwest: 5% of income from government
  • Bikes Not Bombs Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
16get no government money at all
67report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Clif Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Clif Family Foundation 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 1332 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Clif Family’s 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