· Private foundation
Dome Construction 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k105 grants · $171k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $185k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Muttville | $46,903 |
| University of California Berkeley Foundation | $25,200 |
| Rooms of Hope | $20,000 |
| American Heart Association | $17,577 |
| AGC Construction Education Foundation | $12,875 |
| Rebuilding Together Peninsula | $12,045 |
| Chico CM Education Foundation | $10,500 |
| Social Good Fund | $10,000 |
| Boys Girls Club of Silicon Valley | $10,000 |
| All Stars Project | $10,000 |
| YMCA Urban Services | $10,000 |
| Cal Poly Construction Management Deptartment | $9,261 |
| San FranciscoMarin Food Bank | $7,965 |
| San Francisco Campus for Jewish Living | $7,500 |
| Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bay Area | $7,239 |
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 (FY21–25, $351k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 99% 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 +5% since the first grant, against +3% for the ones you funded once.
119 repeat relationships — 74 still active in FY2025, 45 since wound down; 39 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $42k 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
- YMYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO4× · 2021–2024 · $335k · revenue +46%
- ROROOMS OF HOPE INC5× · 2021–2025 · $120k · revenue +180%
- AHAmerican Heart Association Inc5× · 2021–2025 · $119k · revenue +33%
Funded once
- CPCal Poly Construction Management Departmentone grant, 2023 · $20k
- CPCal Poly Construction Management Deone grant, 2021 · $15k
- NENAWIC Education Foundationone grant, 2021 · $12k
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 san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.
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.
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…
To promote philanthropy to make santa cruz county a better place to live, now and in the future.we bring together people, ideas, and resources to inspire philanthropy and accomplish great things.
Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.
The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.
Chcf is dedicated to advancing meaningful, measurable improvements in the way the health care delivery system provides care to the people of california, particularly those with low incomes and those whose needs are not well served by the…
The foundation's mission is to improve the oral health of all californians by supporting the dental profession and its efforts to meet community needs.
California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.
The league of california community foundations promotes and strengthens community foundations in california. through collaboration and shared learning among member foundations and building partnerships with private and public entities, we…
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,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Greater Bay Area and the most unlike its peers is Laurel Foundation. 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 33 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.5% 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.
195 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. 195 of the 344 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO ↗
- Who funds ROOMS OF HOPE INC ↗
- Who funds American Heart Association Inc ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds MUTTVILLE ↗
- Who funds CHICO CM EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TOYS FOR TOTS INC ↗
- Who funds LEAP INC ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
- Who funds ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds Rebuilding Together Peninsula ↗
- Who funds MARINE TOYS FOR TOTS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds JACOBS & CUSHMAN SAN DIEGO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK OF CONTRA COSTA AND SOLANO ↗
- Who funds ENVISIONEERS INC ↗
- Who funds The Crayon Initiative ↗
- Who funds ASSOCIATED SCHOOLS OF CONSTRUCTION ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY INITIATIVES ↗
- Who funds AGC CONSTRUCTION EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER ↗
- Who funds EDGEWOOD CENTER FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ↗
- Who funds Big Brothers Big Sisters of the Bay Area ↗
- Who funds FAMILY HOUSE INC ↗
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: East Bay Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Marin Community Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · United Way of the Bay Area · McNabb Foundation · The Sobrato Family Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · The Intuit Foundation · Tipping Point Community
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 Dome Construction 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.
- Youth Continuum Inc — 76% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% of income from government
- K9S for Warriors 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Dome Construction Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Dome Construction 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.