Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Ernest Lieblich Foundation

Supporting organization to the california community foundation.

$663k
Granted FY2017
13
Grants FY2017
3
States reached
$175k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

95% of Ernest Lieblich Foundation’s FY2019 grant dollars went to California Community Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2019 names 3 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2017, the last year Ernest Lieblich Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 9 organizations, $663k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

9
17
9
18
3
19

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172019.

Philanthropy$837kArts & Culture$225kEnvironment$165kAnimals$113kScience & Tech$20kHealth$16kHuman Services$15kYouth Development$5kOther$0
02FY2017 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2017

  • Under $10k1 grant · $3k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $75k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $585k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$175,000
LOS ANGELES NEIGHBORHOOD LAND TRUST$150,000
YOUNG ARTISTS INTERNATIONAL (IPALPITI ARTISTS INTERNATIONAL)$100,000
SAN FERNANDO VALLEY YOUTH CHORUS$80,000
LIVING LOVE ANIMAL RESCUE$80,000
HARMONY PROJECT$15,000
PROMISE FOUNDATION$10,000
TEJON RANCH CONSERVANCY$10,000
PASADENA CONSERVATORY OF MUSIC$10,000
BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY$10,000
HILLSIDES$10,000
J PAUL GETTY TRUST$10,000
CALVERT STREET ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PTA$3,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–18, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%HILLSIDES: $10k → 14%HILLSIDES: $5k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

25%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$140k · 4 repeat orgs$427k to everyone else

4 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2017, 0 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2017 (too recent to call). Read against FY2017, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
15

Total granted

$140k
$427k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+37%

Still filing today

100%
73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 33% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19
EnvironmentAnimalsArts & CultureHuman ServicesEducationPhilanthropyOther

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

  • H
    HILLSIDES
    2× · 2017–2018 · $15k · revenue +31%
  • BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY
    2× · 2017–2019 · $15k · revenue +31%
  • Pasadena Conservatory of Music
    2× · 2017–2018 · $15k · revenue +47%

Funded once

  • LA
    Los Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust
    one grant, 2017 · $150k · revenue +15%
  • YA
    YOUNG ARTISTS INTERNATIONAL (IPALPITI ARTISTS INTERNATIONAL)
    one grant, 2017 · $100k
  • SF
    San Fernando Valley Youth Chorusgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $80k · revenue +96%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
The Wildlands Conservancy

The Wildlands Conservancy's dual mission is to preserve the beauty and biodiversity of the earth and to provide programs so that children may know the wonder and joy of nature.

Environment
2
Los Angeles River Revitalization Corporation dba River La

Engage.Protect.Enhance.Weareonamissiontobringpeople,water,andnaturetogetherwhilepursuingasustainablerevitalization of the Los Angeles River corridor.

Community Improvement
3
Los Angeles Center of Photography

Los Angeles Center of Photography promotes photography through its educational programs, exhibits, and other creative opportunties and venues.

Arts & Culture
4
Nature Collective

Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…

Environment
5
American Museum of Natural History

The museum's mission statement is: "to discover, interpret, and disseminate - through scientific research and education - knowledge about human cultures, the natural world, and the universe."

Arts & Culture
6
California Institute of Contemporary Art
7
Chile-California Council

The Chile-California Council is a San Francisco-based nonprofit dedicated to developing and promoting joint endeavors and cooperative relations between Chile and California, as well as individuals, legal entities and other institutions in…

International
8
Arlington Garden in Pasadena

Arlington Garden is a climate-appropriate, habitat garden offering learning, inspiration, and enjoyment for all.

Environment
9
League of Women Voters of Los Angeles

The League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan political organization, encourages informed and active participation in government, works to increase understanding of major public policy issues, and influences public policy through education and…

10
Community Conservation Solutions

Develop integrated and science-based solutions to complex environmental problems to protect natural lands, water, wildlife and human communities.

11
Friends of Residential Treasuresla

The organization is dedicated to energizing, educating and connecting angelenos through the dynamic stories of our homes, neighborhoods and architecture.

Community Improvement
12
Conservation Society of California

Through management of oakland zoo, the conservation society of california deepens connection with animals, saves wildlife, and inspires champions for the natural world.

Animals

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is California Community Foundation and the most unlike its peers is The J Paul Getty Trust. 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

17 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 17 of the 20 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/17
Grantees still filing
13/17
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $837,000 · PhilanthropyCALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION+1 more — $10,000 · PhilanthropyLos Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust — $150,000 · EnvironmentLos Angeles N…Tejon Ranch Conservancy — $10,000 · EnvironmentTejon Ranch C…+1 more — $5,000 · EnvironmentYOUNG ARTISTS INTERNATIONAL (IPALPITI ARTISTS INTERNATIONAL) — $100,000 · OtherYOUNG ARTIST…PROMISE FOUNDATION — $10,000 · OtherPROMISE FOUN…THE MUSIC GUILD — $5,000 · OtherHarmony Project — $15,000 · OtherHarmony Proj…PRENATAL UNIVERSITY — $6,000 · OtherHUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN FOUNDATION — $5,000 · OtherSTUDENTS RUN AMERICA — $5,000 · Other+1 more — $3,000 · OtherLIVING LOVE ANIMAL RESCUE — $95,000 · AnimalsLIVING LO…BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY — $15,000 · AnimalsBEST FRIE…+1 more — $3,000 · AnimalsSan Fernando Valley Youth Chorus — $80,000 · Arts & CulturePasadena Conservatory of Music — $15,000 · Arts & CultureGRIFFITH OBSERVATORY FOUNDATION — $20,000 · Science & TechHILLSIDES — $15,000 · Human Services
Philanthropy$847,000Environment$165,000Other$149,000Animals$113,000Arts & Culture$95,000Science & Tech$20,000Human Services$15,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetCALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $837,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetLos Angeles Neighborhood Land Trust — $150,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetLIVING LOVE ANIMAL RESCUE — $95,000 over 3y, 44% of budgetGRIFFITH OBSERVATORY FOUNDATION — $20,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHILLSIDES — $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBEST FRIENDS ANIMAL SOCIETY — $15,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPasadena Conservatory of Music — $15,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetHarmony Project — $15,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE J PAUL GETTY TRUST — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTejon Ranch Conservancy — $10,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetPRENATAL UNIVERSITY — $6,000 over 1y, 6.2% of budgetHUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN FOUNDATION — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSTUDENTS RUN AMERICA — $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWILDLIFE WAYSTATION — $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

California Community FoundationCA18× affinity7 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · The Rose Hills Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · 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 Ernest Lieblich 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Ernest Lieblich Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Ernest Lieblich 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 20 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2017, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph