Skip to content
Dave Durbano Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Dave Durbano Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$460k
Granted FY2025still arriving
28
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0174% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Animals$454kPhilanthropy$101kHuman Services$73kYouth Development$48kHousing & Shelter$30kHealth$15kArts & Culture$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 28 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k25 grants · $400k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$15,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$753k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$50,000
GREAT PYRENESE RESCUE FOUNDATION$30,000
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR MONTEREY COUNTY$25,000
Individual grant recipient$24,000
Individual grant recipient$22,000
LOVING ANGEL SERVICE DOGS$20,000
HORSE WARRIORS$17,000
THE GOLDEN BARK FOUNDATION$17,000
FUREVER FRIENDS ANIMAL OASIS$16,000
WILDLIFE REHAB CENTER OF NORTHERN UTAH$16,000
COMMUNITY ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY (CAWS)$15,000
SANCTUARY HORSES$15,000
Individual grant recipient$15,000
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE$15,000
Individual grant recipient$15,000
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 (FY24–25, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%LOVING ANGEL SERVICE DOGS: $20k → 10%LOVING ANGEL SERVICE DOGS: $15k → 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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 26 repeat orgs$119k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +27% since the first grant, against -16% for those funded once.

26 repeat relationships: 23 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

26
7

Total granted

$1.2M
$42k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%
-16%

Still filing today

38%
57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $77k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHealthArts & CultureYouth DevelopmentHuman 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

  • UA
    UTAH ANIMAL ADVOCACY FOUNDATION
    5× · 2021–2025 · $70k · revenue +43%
  • HW
    HORSE WARRIORS
    3× · 2023–2025 · $40k · revenue +27%
  • SR
    Salt River Wild Horse Management Group Inc
    3× · 2023–2025 · $38k · revenue +33%

Funded once

  • HF
    HAYESTOUGH FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue -81%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
  • HR
    HOPES RESCUE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue -31%
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
Hope Fur Paws Rescue

To help injured, abandoned and unwanted animals. We provide food, vet care that includes heartworm prevention and spay or neuter services, shelter and anything else needed.

Animals
2
2nd Chance Ranch and Rescue

Sanctuary for abused or abandoned animals

Animals
3
St Clouds Rescue
Animals
4
Pom and the Hound Animal Refuge

Animal Welfare

—
5
Fred's Mission Rescue and Sanctuary

Rescue dogs, which includes housing, vetting, and transport.

Animals
6
Their Lives Matter

Dog rescue and care nurturing finding a home

Animals
7
Who Rescued Who

Fostering and caring for dogs until they find their forever home. If medical care is needed a licensed veterinarian will be available to provide care.

—
8
Anas Safe Haven Rescue Inc

Animal Welfare

Animals
9
Fur Animal Rescue

Animal rescue organization dedicated to finding homes for animals at the animal shelter. we also provde vet care foster homes, and assistance with homing for special needs animals.

Animals
10
Saved By Fate Inc

Dog rescue

Animals
11
Sparky's Paradise Rescue Ranch

Pet rescue

—
12
Wolfe Ranch Rescue
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sanctuary Horses; the most unlike its peers is Hayestough Foundation. 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

18 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

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 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 18 of the 38 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/18
Grantees still filing
10/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SPAY NEUTER IMPERATIVE PROJECT: $105,000 · OtherSPAY NEUTER IMPERATIVE PROJECTIndividual grant recipient: $89,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $87,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientGREAT PYRENESE RESCUE FOUNDATION: $81,000 · OtherGREAT PYRENESE RESCUE FOUNDATIONJACKSON DAY FOUNDATION: $62,000 · OtherJACKSON DAY FOUNDATIONAT LIBERTY RANCH: $61,000 · OtherAT LIBERTY RANCHLAZY B EQUINE RESCUE OF UT: $60,000 · OtherLAZY B EQUINE RESCUE OF UTIndividual grant recipient: $51,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $50,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $48,000 · OtherLOVING ANGLE SERVICE DOGS: $48,000 · OtherST ANNE'S CENTER: $35,000 · OtherSTREET DAWG CREW OF UT: $34,000 · Other+10 more: $189,500 · Other+10 moreUTAH ANIMAL ADVOCACY FOUNDATION: $70,000 · AnimalsUTAH ANIMAL ADVOCAC…Salt River Wild Horse Management Group Inc: $38,000 · AnimalsSalt River Wild Hor…GOLDEN BARK FOUNDATION: $30,000 · AnimalsGOLDEN BARK FOUNDAT…FUREVER FRIENDS ANIMAL OASIS: $29,000 · AnimalsFUREVER FRIENDS ANI…SANCTUARY HORSES: $28,000 · AnimalsSANCTUARY HORSESDUSTIN TIME RESCUE: $25,000 · AnimalsDUSTIN TIME RESCUECOMMUNITY ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY -: $15,000 · AnimalsCOMMUNITY ANIMAL WE…+2 more: $6,000 · AnimalsCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE: $69,000 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR MONTEREY COUNTY: $25,000 · PhilanthropyHORSE WARRIORS: $40,000 · Youth DevelopmentLOVING ANGEL SERVICE DOGS INC: $35,000 · Human ServicesHAYESTOUGH FOUNDATION: $15,000 · HealthOUR RESCUE: $5,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$1,000,500Animals$241,000Philanthropy$94,000Youth Development$40,000Human Services$35,000Health$15,000Arts & Culture$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUTAH ANIMAL ADVOCACY FOUNDATION: $70,000 over 5y, 9.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE: $69,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetHORSE WARRIORS: $40,000 over 3y, 9.9% of budgetSalt River Wild Horse Management Group Inc: $38,000 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetLOVING ANGEL SERVICE DOGS INC: $35,000 over 2y, 35% of budgetST ANNE'S CENTER: $35,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetGOLDEN BARK FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetFUREVER FRIENDS ANIMAL OASIS: $29,000 over 2y, 16% of budgetSANCTUARY HORSES: $28,000 over 2y, 26% of budgetDUSTIN TIME RESCUE: $25,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetFISHER HOUSE FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHAYESTOUGH FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 8.5% of budgetHOPES RESCUE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetOUR RESCUE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds UTAH ANIMAL ADVOCACY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE ↗
  • Who funds HORSE WARRIORS ↗
  • Who funds Salt River Wild Horse Management Group Inc ↗
  • Who funds LOVING ANGEL SERVICE DOGS INC ↗
  • Who funds ST ANNE'S CENTER ↗
  • Who funds GOLDEN BARK FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FUREVER FRIENDS ANIMAL OASIS ↗
  • Who funds SANCTUARY HORSES ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION FOR MONTEREY COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds DUSTIN TIME RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds FISHER HOUSE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds HAYESTOUGH FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY ANIMAL WELFARE SOCIETY - ↗
  • Who funds HOPES RESCUE INC ↗
  • Who funds OUR RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds Big Guy Littles World Sanctuary Inc ↗
  • Who funds FORGOTTEN TO SPOILED ROTTEN SANCTUARY ↗

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.

Paypal Charitable Giv…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Paypal Charitable Giving FundDC7.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Dave Durbano Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Dave Durbano Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 Dave Durbano Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Dave Durbano 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 38 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Dave Durbano 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