Does Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust accept unsolicited applications?

Its most recent filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and does not take unsolicited requests. Check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

Which funders back the same organizations as Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Boston Foundation Inc, Silicon Valley Community Foundation, Foundation for the Carolinas.

Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust

Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust

Q: How much does Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust give?

Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust reported 50 grants totaling $11,068,912 in its FY2025 IRS filing. It funded between 20 and 27 organizations a year over FY2018 to FY2024.

Q: What does Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust fund?

By grant dollars over FY2017 to FY2025, its largest causes are International (80%), Philanthropy (9%), Education (3%).

Q: Who are Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2017 to FY2025: Msi US ($13M), International Planned Parenthood Federation Western Hemisphere Region ($7.4M), One World Childrens Fund ($4.9M).

Q: Does Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust fund new organizations?

In FY2024, 9% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.

Q: Where is Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust based?

Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust is based in DE.

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.

$11M

Granted FY2025still arriving

Grants FY2025still arriving

States reached

$937k

Largest

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 2025.

International$60MPhilanthropy$6.9MEducation$2.3MHealth$1.5MCivil Rights$1.4MHuman Services$800kEnvironment$525kArts & Culture$496kOther$0

02FY2025 · 50 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

Under $10k4 grants · $19k
$10k–50k13 grants · $344k
$50k–250k16 grants · $2.4M
$250k+17 grants · $8.3M

$150,000

Median grant

States reached

$266M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
WOMENS INTERNATIONAL NETWORK FOR GUATEMALAN SOLUTI	$936,876
PHILANTHROPIC VENTURES FOUNDATION	$902,598
IPPF - FOS FEMINISTA	$660,000
IPPF - FOS FEMINISTA	$591,855
MSI US	$589,728
MSI US	$579,910
ONE WORLD CHILDRENS FUND	$565,315
IPAS	$534,406
IPPF - FOS FEMINISTA	$492,379
MSI US	$484,984
DKT INTERNATIONAL INC	$367,490
PHILANTHROPIC VENTURES FOUNDATION	$313,079
IPPF - FOS FEMINISTA	$271,272
IPPF - FOS FEMINISTA	$268,525
IPPF - FOS FEMINISTA	$255,552

02The need

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 (FY17–19, $770k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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

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.

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 47% of Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 24% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 3%.

Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trustlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 93% directed abroad (not shown)

How this is measured

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.

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.

$61M · 38 repeat orgs$6.2M to everyone else

38 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$61M

$2.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+14%

+462%

Still filing today

76%

25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 61% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.6M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

InternationalPhilanthropyHealthEducationEnvironmentArts & CultureOther

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

INTERNATIONAL PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION WESTERN HEMISPHERE REGION
3× · 2022–2024 · $7.4M · revenue +50%
WI
WOMENS INTERNATIONAL NETWORK FOR GUATEMALAN SOLUTIONS INC
3× · 2023–2025 · $2.1M · revenue +27% · 30% of their budget
BO
BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF WHITMAN COLLEGE
9× · 2017–2025 · $245k · revenue +87%

Funded once

I
IPFF
one grant, 2017 · $885k
OW
ONE WORLD CHILDREN'S FUND
one grant, 2019 · $753k
M
MSI
one grant, 2017 · $734k

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.

Intrahealth International Inc

Our mission is to improve the performance of health workers and strengthen the systems in which they work.

Health

International Partnership for Microbicides Inc

To develop hiv prevention products and other sexual and reproductive health technologies for women, and to make them available and accessible where they are urgently needed.

—

Guttmacher Institute Inc

The institute is a leading research and policy organization committed to advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the united states and globally.

—

International Aids Vaccine Initiative Inc

A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.

International

The Population Council Inc

We generate ideas, produce evidence, and design solutions to improve the lives of underserved populations around the world. we take a multidisciplinary, intergenerational, life-cycle approach that contributes to (see schedule o)four global…

International

Planned Parenthood Global Inc

To advance the planned parenthood mission internationally, including support for the provision and protection of sexual and reproductive health services and rights, and ensuring that all people have access to reproductive and sexual…

Health

World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International

Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest

To ensure broad public access to sexual and reproductive health care through direct service, education and advocacy.

Health

Population Action International

Pai advances evidence, policies and programs to enable women, youth and at-risk communities to access sexual and reproductive health as core to health equity, climate resilience, economic well-being and gender equality.

Health

International Development Enterprises

See schedule o for a more detailed description of ide's mission statement and achievements.

International

Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

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.

Crime & Legal

Parliamentarians for Global Action

Parliamentarians for global action (pga) is a non-partisan ngo network of legislators from all regions of the world acting in their individual capacity to advocate for human rights, democracy, and the rule of law; peace and human security;…

International

How this is measured

The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ipas; the most unlike its peers is Imperial County Historical Society. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

34 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. 34 of the 50 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

34/34

Grantees still filing

19/34

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Other$27,199,448Philanthropy$24,939,187International$19,096,188Education$2,264,464Human Services$770,333Environment$524,789Arts & Culture$275,000

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

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.

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.

Boston Foundation IncMA18.7× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Boston Foundation Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Foundation for the Carolinas · The Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation · Give Lively Foundation Inc · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · EcoTrust · The Richard R Howe Foundation · Segal Family Foundation Inc · 128 Collective Foundation · Wellspring Philanthropic Fund Inc · American Endowment 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 Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

1get no government money at all

11report 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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust?

Find your warmest path to Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A Charitable Trust 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.

Play a game based on Erik E and Edith H Bergstrom Foundation A’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