Skip to content

· Public charity

George Lopez Foundation

Our mission is to create positive, permanent change for underprivileged children, adults and military families confronting challenges in education and health, as well as increasing community awareness about kidney disease and organ donation.

$138k
Granted FY2024still arriving
1
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$30k
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 2024.

Youth Development$276kPhilanthropy$52kHealth$22kRecreation & Sports$20kFood & Nutrition$5k
02FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $30,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $138,241 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $108,241 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.
$30,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$641k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE PAINTED TURTLE$30,000
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 (FY23–23, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Teens for Food Justice: $5k → 17%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 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
Ty Louis Campbell Foundation Inc

None

Health
2
Warrior Kids Foundation
Health
3
Kids Join the Fight

To empower kids to join the fight against pediatric cancer by raising money to provide local care for pediatric cancer patients and their families and to fund research to cure childhood cancer.

Arts & Culture
4
Live Like Bella Inc

The Live Like Bella Childhood Cancer Foundation is committed to being a recognized leader in childhood cancer research and advocacy while providing financial and emotional support to hundreds of families whose children are battling cancer.

Health
5
Childrens Cancer Therapy Development Institute

To make all childhood cancers universally survivable by delivering new treatments to clinical trials through scientific discovery.

—
6
The Larry & Cathy Lung Cancer Foundation
Health
7
Kt Strong Corporation

Stomach cancer

Health
8
Girl Power 2 Cure Dba Rett University

To raise awareness and funds for treatments and a cure for rett syndrome as well as to provide family support and education.

Health
9
Taylor Steele Cancer Foundation
Health
10
Tony Laudadio Foundation

To provide critical financial assistance to families affected by cancer.

Philanthropy
11
The Chris Lantos Foundation

The Chris Lantos Foundation improves the lives of pediatric cancer patients and their families through charitable acts of kindness that support their physical, mental, emotional, and spiritual well-being while also raising public awareness…

Health
12
Lightning and Love Foundation

To raise awareness advance scientific r

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Painted Turtle; the most unlike its peers is Johnny Crisstopher Childrens Charitable Foundation Jds. 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

8 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. 8 of the 9 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE PAINTED TURTLE: $260,500 · Youth DevelopmentTHE PAINTED TURTLEGIRLS INC OF GREATER LOS ANGELES: $15,000 · Youth DevelopmentGIRLS INC OF GREATER LOS ANGELESCT3 FOUNDATION: $52,000 · Community ImprovementCT3 FOUNDATIONTIGER BASEBALL CLUB: $10,000 · OtherTIGER BAS…HER TOO: $10,000 · OtherHER TOOLIFT FOR THE 22 INC: $10,000 · OtherLIFT FOR …JOHNNY CRISSTOPHER CHILDRENS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION JDS: $5,876 · HealthSUGAR RAY LEONARD FOUNDATION: $5,745 · HealthTEENS FOR FOOD JUSTICE INC: $5,181 · Human Services
Youth Development$275,500Community Improvement$52,000Other$30,000Health$11,621Human Services$5,181

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE PAINTED TURTLE: $260,500 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetGIRLS INC OF GREATER LOS ANGELES: $15,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetHER TOO: $10,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetLIFT FOR THE 22 INC: $10,000 over 1y, 6.9% of budgetJOHNNY CRISSTOPHER CHILDRENS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION JDS: $5,876 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSUGAR RAY LEONARD FOUNDATION: $5,745 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetTEENS FOR FOOD JUSTICE INC: $5,181 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization George Lopez Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from George Lopez Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to George Lopez Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to George Lopez 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 9 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on George Lopez’s filings →

    More from the funding graph