· Private foundation
Elizabeth Pang Fullerton 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 $10k2 grants · $10k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
| GOLDEN STATE WARRIORS COMMUNITY DCERA | $20,000 |
| OLYMPIC CLUB FOUNDATION | $10,200 |
| THE BATTERY FOUNDATION | $5,150 |
| SF SEOUL SISTER CITY COMMITTEE | $5,000 |
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 US giving — 89% of grant dollars ($2.3M). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 11% that went abroad ($288k) is mapped below.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 6% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Beyond the US — 11% of all-years giving ($288k)
1 country, by the recipient’s country on the filing.
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
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.
15 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 1 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, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
- WIWILDAID INC5× · 2017–2022 · $1.0M · revenue +5%
- TSThe Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc3× · 2017–2019 · $33k · revenue +47%
- SFSAN FRANCISCO BALLET ASSOCIATION3× · 2018–2021 · $30k · revenue +30%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2018 · $100k
- OUOCEAN UNITEone grant, 2018 · $57k
- NTNational Tennis Foundation Incgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $55k · revenue +28%
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.
Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.
We believe opera is a uniquely compelling, entertaining and emotionally thrilling art form. our mission is to bring together growing audiences to experience opera's transformative power.
To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.
As the only community foundation for the ocean, The Ocean Foundation's 501(c)(3) mission is to improve global ocean health, climate resilience, and the blue economy. We create partnerships to connect people in the communities in which we…
SFP presents internationally acclaimed and emerging performing artists, introduces innovative programs, and builds new and diversified audiences for the arts through education and outreach activities.
The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…
The mission of the breast cancer research foundation, inc. is to prevent and cure breast cancer by advancing the world's most promising research.
Mission: the mission of san diego opera is to deliver exceptional performances and exciting, accessible programs to diverse audiences, focusing on community partnerships, and the transformative and expressive power of the human voice. as…
The bar association of san francisco champions equal access to justice and promotes humanity, excellence, and diversity in the legal profession. we provide legal services to disadvantaged and underserved individuals in san francisco. we…
See schedule 0founded in 1994, opera santa barbara is the signature provider of professional opera on the california central coast. we aspire to be a cultural leader in the santa barbara region, voicing and advancing our community's spirit…
See schedule othe mission of ucsf health medical foundation is threefold: 1) to establish, operate and maintain medical clinics for the provision of healthcare services in california; 2) to promote health by providing, coordinating,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Olympic Club Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Castro Organ Devotees Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
13 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. 13 of the 32 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 WILDAID INC ↗
- Who funds National Tennis Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CASTRO ORGAN DEVOTEES ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO OPERA GUILD AT THE WAR MEMORIAL OPERA HOUSE ↗
- Who funds The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO BALLET ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds BENEATH THE WAVES INC ↗
- Who funds THE LEAP FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds OLYMPIC CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FERRARI OWNERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE PACIFIC PEDIATRIC NEURO-ONCOLOG CONSORTIUM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE BATTERY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SLIDE RANCH ↗
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: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Elizabeth Pang Fullerton 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.
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 Elizabeth Pang Fullerton Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Elizabeth Pang Fullerton 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.