· Private foundation
Diane and Dorothy Brooks Foundation
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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $8k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $70k
- $50k–250k6 grants · $650k
- $250k+12 grants · $5.1M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LA YOUTH NETWORK DBA EMERGING STRONGER | $507,500 |
| MY FRIEND'S PLACE | $505,000 |
| CASA OF LOS ANGELES | $500,000 |
| NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN FUND INC | $500,000 |
| FOOD FORWARD INC | $500,000 |
| HOLA - HEART OF LOS ANGELES | $500,000 |
| JERICHO PROJECT | $500,000 |
| COMMUNITY FOOD BANK OF NEW JERSEY | $400,000 |
| COVENANT HOUSE CALIFORNIA | $300,000 |
| PEOPLE ASSISTING THE HOMELESS | $300,000 |
| BEAUTY BUS FOUNDATION | $300,000 |
| CEDARS SINAI MED CTR | $275,000 |
| MAKE GOOD INC | $200,000 |
| CRISIS TEXT LINE INC | $150,000 |
| CHILDREN OF HEROES OF UKRAINE FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $2.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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 +42% since the first grant, against +37% for the ones you funded once.
56 repeat relationships — 17 still active in FY2024, 39 since wound down; 6 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, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.2M 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
- TLTHE LOS ANGELES FREE CLINIC5× · 2017–2021 · $2.7M · revenue +236%
- FFFOOD FORWARD INC4× · 2020–2024 · $2.2M · revenue +64%
CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER5× · 2019–2024 · $1.9M · revenue +50%
Funded once
- UDUCLA DEPRESSION GRAND CHALLENGEone grant, 2022 · $1.0M
- UWUNITED WAY OF WEST CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI INCone grant, 2023 · $600k · revenue -68% · 27% of their budget
- TSTHE SABAN FREE CLINICone grant, 2023 · $552k
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.
Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Community organizing, education, advocacy, leadership development, direct services and organizational development for communities faced with immense poverty.
Hollywood food coalition welcomes people to dinner each night. we rescue and redistribute food daily to other organizations. we care for our immediate community through our wellness program. we build community with and through our…
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
For more than five decades, public advocates has challenged the systemic causes of poverty and racial discrimination by strengthening community voices in public policy and achieving tangible legal victories advancing education, housing,…
The organization is a non-partisan, membership based speakers' forum that connects business leaders, community members, and engaged individuals with shared interest in local, national, and global affairs. it provides an open and accessible…
Chamber's mission: design and advance opportunities and solutions for a thriving regional economy that are inclusive and globally competitive. 1) advocacy - be a bold advocate for business as a driver of a strong economy that enables…
To distribute public affairs and other educational information in order to create an electronic bridge between californians and their public officials, and, in the process educate a new generation of voting citizens and civic leaders who…
Meeting the professional needs of los angeles lawyers, and improving the administration of justice.
The la conservation corps creates equitable opportunities for young people to build resilience in themselves, their communities and the environment through a program of work, education and support.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Voter Registration Project and the most unlike its peers is Malibu Friends of Music. 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 32 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) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 2% 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.
114 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. 114 of the 175 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 THE LOS ANGELES FREE CLINIC ↗
- Who funds FOOD FORWARD INC ↗
- Who funds CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law ↗
- Who funds SHARE OUR STRENGTH ↗
- Who funds HOPEWELL FUND ↗
- Who funds JERICHO PROJECT ↗
- Who funds CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC ↗
- Who funds COVENANT HOUSE CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds National Vote At Home Institute ↗
- Who funds BEAUTY BUS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MAYO CLINIC ↗
- Who funds CASA OF LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds LA FAMILY HOUSING CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF WEST CENTRAL MISSISSIPPI INC ↗
- Who funds MAKE GOOD INC ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES REGIONAL FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds VOTER REGISTRATION PROJECT ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE ACTORS' FUND OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds SCHOOL ON WHEELS INC ↗
- Who funds PARA LOS NINOS ↗
- Who funds BABY2BABY ↗
- Who funds Community Food Bank Of New Jersey Inc ↗
- Who funds CRISIS TEXT LINE INC ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS INC ↗
- Who funds Neighborhood Legal Services of Los Angeles County ↗
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: California Community Foundation · The Ahmanson Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Annenberg Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Weingart Foundation · The Rose Hills Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · The Broder Foundation · The David Geffen 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 Diane and Dorothy Brooks Foundation 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.
- Bonneville Environmental Foundation — 100% of income from government
- Martha's Vineyard Community Foundation Inc — 34% of income from government
- Innocence Project of Florida Inc — 30% of income from government
- Island Grown Initiative Ltd — 0% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Diane and Dorothy Brooks Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Diane and Dorothy Brooks 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.