Skip to content
Donald Brian Miselis Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Donald Brian Miselis 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.

$102k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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$156kRecreation & Sports$48kEducation$21kCrime & Legal$17kHealth$15kYouth Development$8kArts & Culture$8kHuman Services$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $30k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$5,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$3.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MENDOCINO LAND TRUST$50,000
INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE$10,000
THE HARWOOD MEMORIAL PARK$10,000
MENDOCINO PRODUCERS GUILD$10,000
LAYTONVILLE LONG VALLEY LIONESS CLU$8,000
BOSTON UNIVERSITY$5,000
COPPER RIVER WATERSHED PROJECT$5,000
MENDOCINO CO PUBLIC BROADCASTING$1,000
REDWOOD COMMUNITY RADIO$1,000
PRO PUBLICA$1,000
REDWOOD EMPIRE FOOD BANK$500
EARTHMIND$500
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 (FY21–22, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%COMMUNITY PARTNERS INTL: $1k → 7%TAHOE COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS: $500 → 8%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
VT
ID
NY
NV
CA
CO
VA
MD
AZ
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.

82%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$305k · 14 repeat orgs$67k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
27

Total granted

$305k
$50k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+68%

Still filing today

79%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentRecreation & SportsAnimalsArts & CultureEducationHuman 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

  • ML
    Mendocino Land Trust
    3× · 2023–2025 · $140k · revenue +27%
  • TH
    THE HARWOOD MEMORIAL PARK INC
    5× · 2020–2025 · $50k · revenue +28%
  • ER
    EEL RIVER RECOVERY PROJECT INC
    4× · 2020–2023 · $30k · revenue ×16

Funded once

  • LH
    LAYTONVILLE HEALTH START
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
  • HS
    HEALTH START
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • ER
    Eel River Recovery Project
    one grant, 2019 · $4k
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
Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…

Environment
2
Save the Redwoods League

Save the redwoods league protects and restores redwood forests and connects people with their peace and beauty so these wonders of the natural world flourish.

Environment
3
The Jmt Wilderness Conservancy

Working to restore the watersheds, wilderness, and wildlife in the high sierra nevada following the john muir trail (est. 1915) for all life in california.

Environment
4
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
5
Tuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance

At Yosemite Rivers Alliance, we unite conservation and community to protect and restore the three rivers that ?ow through the Yosemite Regionthe Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and Merced.

—
6
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
7
The Sierra Fund

The Sierra Fund (TSF) is a non-profit organization with a mission to restore ecosystem and community resiliency in the Sierra Nevada.

Environment
8
CalWild

The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.

—
9
Sempervirens Fund

To ensure coast redwood forests in the santa cruz mountains thrive for generations to come. since 1900, sempervirens has protected more than 36,000 acres. learn more about our mission, vision, and strategic plan through 2030 at:…

Environment
10
National Forest Foundation

The national forest foundation (nff), chartered by congress, turns america's love of nature into meaningful action for 193-million acre national forest system through on the ground program work and grant making activities, and accepts and…

Recreation & Sports
11
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
12
Redwood Forest Foundation Inc

The mission of this organization is to acquire, protect, restore and manage forestlands and other resources in the redwood region for the long-term benefit of the communities located there.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Winnarainbow Inc Dba Camp Winnarainbow; the most unlike its peers is K9 Global Rescue. 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

24 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. 24 of the 47 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/24
Grantees still filing
15/24
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Mendocino Land Trust: $140,000 · EnvironmentMendocino Land TrustEEL RIVER RECOVERY PROJECT INC: $30,000 · EnvironmentEEL RIVER RECOVERY PROJECT INCCopper River Watershed Project: $11,000 · EnvironmentCopper River Watershed Project+3 more: $6,500 · EnvironmentTHE HARWOOD MEMORIAL PARK INC: $50,000 · OtherTHE HARWOOD MEMORIAL PARK INCTrees Foundation: $20,000 · OtherTrees FoundationLAYTONVILLE LONG VALLEY LIONESS LIONS CLUB: $13,000 · OtherLAYTONVILLE LONG VALLEY LIONESS LIONS CLUBLAYTONVILLE HEALTH START: $10,000 · OtherLAYTONVILLE HEALTH STARTMENDOCINO PRODUCERS GUILD: $10,000 · OtherMENDOCINO PRODUCERS GUILDHealthy Start: $8,000 · OtherWHITTELL BOOSTERS CLUB INC: $6,000 · Other+26 more: $40,420 · Other+26 moreINSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE: $27,000 · Civil RightsSOS OUTREACH: $5,500 · Recreation & SportsWINNARAINBOW INC DBA CAMP WINNARAINBOW: $2,000 · Recreation & SportsPRO PUBLICA INC: $4,500 · Arts & CultureREDWOOD COMMUNITY RADIO INC: $2,000 · Arts & CultureMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $4,000 · InternationalTAHOE COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS: $1,500 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL: $1,000 · Human Services
Environment$187,500Other$157,420Civil Rights$27,000Recreation & Sports$7,500Arts & Culture$6,500International$4,000Human Services$2,500

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 budgetMendocino Land Trust: $140,000 over 3y, 2.3% of budgetTHE HARWOOD MEMORIAL PARK INC: $50,000 over 5y, 2.9% of budgetEEL RIVER RECOVERY PROJECT INC: $30,000 over 4y, 6.4% of budgetINSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE: $27,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTrees Foundation: $20,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetCopper River Watershed Project: $11,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetWHITTELL BOOSTERS CLUB INC: $6,000 over 2y, 14% of budgetSOS OUTREACH: $5,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPRO PUBLICA INC: $4,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCLOUD FOREST INSTITUTE: $3,000 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetFor The Wild Collective: $3,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetWINNARAINBOW INC DBA CAMP WINNARAINBOW: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetREDWOOD COMMUNITY RADIO INC: $2,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTAHOE COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS: $1,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetIDYLLWILD ARTS FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVERMONT ACADEMY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDouglas Animal Welfare Group: $500 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetREDWOOD EMPIRE FOOD BANK: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWILDLAND FIREFIGHTER FOUNDATION: $500 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 Mendocino Land Trust ↗
  • Who funds THE HARWOOD MEMORIAL PARK INC ↗
  • Who funds EEL RIVER RECOVERY PROJECT INC ↗
  • Who funds INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds Trees Foundation ↗
  • Who funds Copper River Watershed Project ↗
  • Who funds WHITTELL BOOSTERS CLUB INC ↗
  • Who funds SOS OUTREACH ↗
  • Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds PRO PUBLICA INC ↗
  • Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
  • Who funds CLOUD FOREST INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds For The Wild Collective ↗
  • Who funds WINNARAINBOW INC DBA CAMP WINNARAINBOW ↗
  • Who funds REDWOOD COMMUNITY RADIO INC ↗
  • Who funds TAHOE COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS ↗
  • Who funds IDYLLWILD ARTS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds VERMONT ACADEMY ↗
  • Who funds K9 GLOBAL RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds COMPUTERCORPS ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds Douglas Animal Welfare Group ↗

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.

Community Foundation …National Philanthropi…Paypal Charitable Giv…Vanguard Charitable E…Network for GoodDonor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Community Foundation of Mendocino CountyCA15.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Mendocino County · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Donald Brian Miselis Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Donald Brian Miselis Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely 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.

    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 47 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 Donald Brian Miselis’ 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