Skip to content

· Private foundation

Feichtmeir 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.

$160k
Granted FY2025still arriving
16
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
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.

Arts & Culture$216kEducation$178kFood & Nutrition$159kHuman Services$105kHealth$51kRecreation & Sports$49kHousing & Shelter$24kReligion$22kOther$0
02FY2025 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ANDERSON VALLEY JR HIGH AND HIGH SC$10,000
GOOD NEWS OF STANISLAUS COUNTY$10,000
FRIENDS OF THE RIPON SENIOR CENTER$10,000
NEW DAY FOR CHILDREN$10,000
CEDAR PASS SNOW PARK$10,000
BRAVO YOUTH ORCHESTRA$10,000
RIPON ARTS LEAGUE$10,000
CHILDRENS HOME OF STKN MUSIC PROGRAM$10,000
HAVEN HEALTHY ALTERNATIVES TO VIOLENT$10,000
CENTER FOR A NON VIOLENT COMMUNITY$10,000
COMMUNITY INITIATIVESHARMONY PROJ SF$10,000
FRIENDS OF RIPON MEMORIAL LIBRARY$10,000
TWO RIVERS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL$10,000
RIPON USD FOR SCIENCE CAMP$10,000
URBAN GLEANERS$10,000
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 (FY17–22, $29k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%HAVEN WOMENS CENTER OF STANISLAUS: $5k → 15%HAVEN WOMENS CENTER OF STANISLAUS: $5k → 15%HAVEN WOMENS CENTER OF STANISLAUS: $5k → 15%HAVEN WOMENS CENTER OF STANISLAUS: $5k → 15%HAVEN WOMENS CENTER OF STANISLAUS: $5k → 15%HAVEN WOMENS CENTER OF STANISLAUS: $4k → 15%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.
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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$803k · 27 repeat orgs$17k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +58% since the first grant, against -10% for those funded once.

27 repeat relationships: 15 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

27
2

Total granted

$803k
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+58%
-10%

Still filing today

26%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
Human ServicesFood & NutritionPublic Safety & DisasterYouth DevelopmentHealthCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • URBAN GLEANERS
    6× · 2020–2025 · $52k · revenue +146%
  • OREGON BRAVO YOUTH ORCHESTRAS
    9× · 2017–2025 · $51k · revenue +15%
  • ND
    NEW DAY FOR CHILDREN
    9× · 2017–2025 · $51k · revenue +86%

Funded once

  • A
    AgSafe
    one grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue -10%
  • RM
    RIPON MEMORIAL LIBRARY
    one grant, 2019 · $2k
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
Farmers Ending Hunger

The organization's mission is to increase the quantity of high quality food commodities donated to the oregon food bank network through a partnership of farmers, food processors, the oregon food bank network and the public.

Human Services
2
Extrafood

Food Rescue - The Organization rescues excess fresh food from Bay Area businesses, schools and non-profits and immediately delivers the food to safety net partners - such as senior housing centers, after-school programs, and homeless…

Food & Nutrition
3
Alameda Emergency Food Dba Alameda Food Bank

Founded in 1977, The Alameda Food Bank is a non-profit organization that helps Alameda residents in need by providing nourishing food in compassionate and respectful manner with the support of dedicated volunteers and local partners.

Food & Nutrition
4
Oregon Community Food System Network

The oregon community food systems network brings people and organizations together to broaden understanding of issues, build relationships and trust, develop common purpose, and create collective capacity to realize our shared vision.

Food & Nutrition
5
Outgrowing Hunger

We nurture connections between people,nature,and food by ensuring access to garden space and farmland, and providing education and mentoring on regenerative and sustainable agricultural practices.

Food & Nutrition
6
Port Angeles Food Bank

Nourishing our community. the port angeles food bank is the main food bank in clallam county, providing food to 13 other area pantries and meal programs as well as providing food to over 5,000 individuals per month.

Food & Nutrition
7
Second Harvest Food Bank Santa Cruz County

Second harvest food bank's mission is to end hunger and malnutrition by educating and involving the community.

Food & Nutrition
8
Yolo Food Bank

The mission of yolo food bank is to make yolo county a thriving community where everyone has the resources they need to experience health, prosperity, and a high quality of life. Yolo Food bank durably increases food and nutrition security…

Food & Nutrition
9
Foodbank of Santa Barbara County Inc

To end hunger and transform the health of our community by providing nourishment to those in need by acquiring and distributing safe nutritious food via local agencies and by providing education to solve hunger and nutritional problems in…

Food & Nutrition
10
Food Forward Inc

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.

Food & Nutrition
11
Everyones Harvest

Everyone's Harvest's mission is to provide access to healthy, affordable fruits and vegetables through certified farmers markets and community food programs.

Food & Nutrition
12
Fresh Approach

The mission of fresh approach is to create long-term change in local food systems by connecting california communities with healthy food from california farmers and expanding knowledge about food and nutrition.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Oregon Food Bank; the most unlike its peers is AgSafe. 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

9 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. 9 of the 30 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RIPON USD FOR SCIENCE CAMP: $51,150 · OtherRIPON USD FOR SCIENCE CAMPFRIENDS OF THE RIPON SENIOR CENTER: $49,150 · OtherFRIENDS OF THE RIPON SENIOR CENTERRIPON ARTS LEAGUE: $49,150 · OtherRIPON ARTS LEAGUECEDAR PASS SNOW PARK: $49,000 · OtherCEDAR PASS SNOW PARKANDERSON VALLEY JR HIGH AND HIGH SC: $42,000 · OtherANDERSON VALLEY JR HIGH AND HIGH SCFRIENDS OF RIPON MEMORIAL LIBRARY: $32,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF RIPON MEMORIAL LIBRARYCHILDRENS HOME OF STKN MUSIC PROGRAM: $32,000 · OtherCHILDRENS HOME OF STKN MUSIC PROGRAMNatomas Unified School Dist: $29,150 · OtherGOOD NEWS OF STANISLAUS: $27,000 · OtherHAVEN HEALTHY ALTERNATIVES TO VIOLENT: $22,000 · OtherCOMMUNITY INITIATIVESHARMONY PROJ SF: $22,000 · OtherGOOD NEWS OF STANISLAUS COUNTY INC: $22,000 · OtherTWO RIVERS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $22,000 · OtherSACRAMENTO FAMILY FOOD BANK: $20,000 · OtherALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $20,000 · OtherSECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK: $20,000 · OtherOREGON FOOD BANK: $20,000 · Other+6 more: $65,750 · Other+6 moreHealthy Alternatives to Violent Environm: $29,150 · Human ServicesTHE CERES COMMUNITY PROJECT: $27,000 · Human ServicesURBAN GLEANERS: $52,000 · Food & NutritionOREGON BRAVO YOUTH ORCHESTRAS: $51,000 · Youth DevelopmentNEW DAY FOR CHILDREN: $51,000 · HealthCenter for a Non Violent Community: $10,000 · Community ImprovementAgSafe: $5,000 · Public Safety & Disaster
Other$594,350Human Services$56,150Food & Nutrition$52,000Youth Development$51,000Health$51,000Community Improvement$10,000Public Safety & Disaster$5,000

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 budgetURBAN GLEANERS: $52,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetOREGON BRAVO YOUTH ORCHESTRAS: $51,000 over 9y, 1.1% of budgetNEW DAY FOR CHILDREN: $51,000 over 9y, 1.4% of budgetHealthy Alternatives to Violent Environm: $29,150 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetTHE CERES COMMUNITY PROJECT: $27,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetOREGON FOOD BANK: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCenter for a Non Violent Community: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetAgSafe: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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 URBAN GLEANERS ↗
  • Who funds OREGON BRAVO YOUTH ORCHESTRAS ↗
  • Who funds NEW DAY FOR CHILDREN ↗
  • Who funds Healthy Alternatives to Violent Environm ↗
  • Who funds THE CERES COMMUNITY PROJECT ↗
  • Who funds ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds OREGON FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds Center for a Non Violent Community ↗
  • Who funds AgSafe ↗

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.

American Online Giving Foundation IncDE6.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Feichtmeir Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Feichtmeir Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 21%
  • Oregon Food Bank: 21% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
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 Feichtmeir Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Feichtmeir 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 30 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 Feichtmeir’s filings →

More from the funding graph