· Private foundation
Frank and Karen Geefay 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k16 grants · $89k
- $10k–50k13 grants · $191k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| INDIAN HEALTH CENTER OF SANTA CLARA VALLEY | $23,000 |
| REMOTE AREA MEDICAL | $23,000 |
| EVERYTOWN SUPPORT FUND | $20,000 |
| SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY | $20,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $20,000 |
| THE WATERSHED RESEARCH AND TRAINING CENTER | $15,000 |
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN | $10,000 |
| OUR CITY FOREST | $10,000 |
| NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO | $10,000 |
| KQED | $10,000 |
| WE HOPE | $10,000 |
| NORTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC MEDIA | $10,000 |
| THE OTHERING & BELONGING INSTITUTE OF UC BERKELEY | $10,000 |
| FREEDOM HUNTERS | $8,000 |
| THEODORE ROOSEVELT CONSERVATION PARTNERSHIP | $8,000 |
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 human-services grants (FY23–25, $21k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +25% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
30 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 17 since wound down; 16 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 50% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $140k 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
- SHSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY4× · 2019–2025 · $34k · revenue +128%
- RAREMOTE AREA MEDICAL2× · 2023–2025 · $27k · revenue +109%
- TWTHE WATERSHED RESEARCH & TRAINING CENTER3× · 2023–2025 · $24k · revenue +139%
Funded once
- WVWEST VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +56%
- ALAsian Law Caucusone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -9%
- IRINTERNATIONAL RELIEF TEAM- PUERTO RICO RELIEFone grant, 2018 · $10k
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.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
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…
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…
The american civil liberties union of northern california (aclu nc union) defends and advances the principles of freedom, equality and justice contained in the united states constitution. aclu nc union, a california mutual benefit…
Valley vision is a civic leadership organization dedicated to improving the livability of the sacramento region. through research and action, we collaborate on bold, long-term solutions that improve people's lives.
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.
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.
Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
To distribute public affairs and other educational information in order to create an electronic bridge between californians and their public officials, and, in the process educate a new generation of voting citizens and civic leaders who…
To advance human rights and social justice in the americas.
For more than five decades, public advocates has challenged the systemic causes of poverty and racial discrimination by strengthening community voices in public policy and achieving tangible legal victories advancing education, housing,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is California State Parks Foundation and the most unlike its peers is The Cost of Courage Foundation Org. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 33 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
47 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. 47 of the 72 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 SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds REMOTE AREA MEDICAL ↗
- Who funds THE WATERSHED RESEARCH & TRAINING CENTER ↗
- Who funds INDIAN HEALTH CENTER OF SANTA CLARA VALLEY ↗
- Who funds WEHOPE ↗
- Who funds KQED INC ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ASIAN AMERICANS ADVANCING JUSTICE - AAJC INC ↗
- Who funds Center for Common Ground ↗
- Who funds Transformca dba Transform ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds VOTERIDERS ↗
- Who funds SPREAD THE VOTE INC ↗
- Who funds Asian Pacific Environmental Network ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY ↗
- Who funds PENINSULA OPEN SPACE TRUST ↗
- Who funds WEST VALLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO INC ↗
- Who funds Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition ↗
- Who funds Asian Law Caucus ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds COMMON CAUSE EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds SAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds LOVE OF ORPHANS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds OUR CITY FOREST ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HEART TO HEART INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA INDIAN MANPOWER CONSORTIUM INC ↗
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: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · The Sobrato Family Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Sunlight Giving · United Way of the Bay Area · East Bay Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · Ella Gayle Hamlin Foundation Inc · The Applied Materials 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 Frank and Karen Geefay 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.