Skip to content
Gnarwhal Community Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Gnarwhal Community Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$38k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0189% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Animals$33kHealth$27kHousing & Shelter$24kEnvironment$24kYouth Development$16kRecreation & Sports$9kCommunity Improvement$8kInternational$6kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $2k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $36k
$10,720
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
KCRW FOUNDATION$25,000
HEAL THE BAY$10,720
SEA TREES$2,170
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 (FY22–24, $33k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%SAFE PLACE FOR YOUTH: $17k → 14%SAFE PLACE FOR YOUTH: $7k → 14%CENTRAL CITY NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERS: $8k → 14%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.

46%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$103k · 4 repeat orgs$122k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +24% since the first grant, against +20% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
12

Total granted

$103k
$95k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
+20%

Still filing today

75%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 28% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthEnvironmentAnimalsInternationalCivil RightsOther
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

  • I
    ISWMP
    2× · 2022–2023 · $36k
  • SA
    SHARK ALLIES
    2× · 2022–2023 · $24k · revenue -47%
  • SP
    SAFE PLACE FOR YOUTH INC
    2× · 2022–2024 · $24k · revenue +36%

Funded once

  • SA
    SEEN AND HEARD
    one grant, 2023 · $16k · revenue -9%
  • AY
    AIM Youth Mental Health
    one grant, 2022 · $9k · revenue +7%
  • SM
    SANTA MONICA ANIMAL SHELTER FOUNDAT
    one grant, 2022 · $9k
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
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
2
Ocean Conservancy

Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.

Environment
3
Turtle Island Restoration Network

To mobilize people in local communities around the world to protect marine wildlife and the oceans and inland watersheds that sustain them.

Environment
4
Biscayne Bay Waterkeeper Inc

In 2025, biscayne bay waterkeeper (d/b/a miami waterkeeper) built on our reputation by navigating challenges, seizing opportunities, and continuing our unwavering commitment to safeguarding our precious waterways and finding local…

Environment
5
Los Angeles Waterkeeper

Los angeles waterkeeper's mission is to fight for the health of the region's waterways, and for sustainable, equitable and climate-friendly water supplies.

Environment
6
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
—
7
Schmidt Ocean Institute
Science & Tech
8
Clean Reefs
Environment
9
Ocean Alliance Project

Protecting and promoting the marine biodiversity of Hawai'i through coral restoration, ecological monitoring, regenerative tourism, and cultural integration

Science & Tech
10
California Trout Inc

Caltrout's mission is ensuring healthy water and resilient wild fish for a better california. we share a common vision of a california where healthy waters flow from headwaters to sea. where the diversity and resilience of our waters and…

Animals
11
Connectocean Conservation and Outreach Inc

Connectocean conservation and outreach is dedicated to fostering ocean stewardship and conserving aquatic ecosystems through community engagement, education, and collaborative conservation efforts. our mission is to connect communities to…

Human Services
12
The Ocean Foundation

As the only community foundation for the ocean, The Ocean Foundation's 501(c)(3) mission is to improve global ocean health, climate resilience, and the blue economy. We create partnerships to connect people in the communities in which we…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Heal the Bay; the most unlike its peers is The 5 Gyres Institute. 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

14 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. 14 of the 18 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
11/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ISWMP: $36,367 · OtherISWMPKCRW FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 · OtherKCRW FOUNDATION INCSANTA MONICA ANIMAL SHELTER FOUNDAT: $8,930 · OtherSANTA MONICA ANIMAL SHELTER FOUNDATNAMI WEST LOS ANGELES: $8,521 · OtherNAMI WEST LOS ANGELESThe 5 Gyres Institute: $8,420 · OtherThe 5 Gyres InstituteWOMENS GLOBAL EMPOWERMENT FUND: $6,248 · OtherWOMENS GLOBAL EMPOWERMENT FUNDWESTSIDE FOOD BANK: $3,500 · Other+2 more: $2,708 · OtherSAFE PLACE FOR YOUTH INC: $24,193 · Human ServicesSAFE PLACE FOR Y…CENTRAL CITY NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERS: $8,499 · Human ServicesCENTRAL CITY NEI…HEAL THE BAY: $18,170 · EnvironmentHEAL THE BAYTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $8,016 · EnvironmentTHE SURFRIDER…SHARK ALLIES: $24,440 · AnimalsSHARK ALLIESAIM Youth Mental Health: $9,281 · HealthHILINSKI'S HOPE INC: $8,340 · HealthSEEN AND HEARD: $16,247 · Youth DevelopmentCOLOR THE WATER: $8,632 · Recreation & Sports
Other$99,694Human Services$32,692Environment$26,186Animals$24,440Health$17,621Youth Development$16,247Recreation & Sports$8,632

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetKCRW FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSHARK ALLIES: $24,440 over 2y, 13% of budgetSAFE PLACE FOR YOUTH INC: $24,193 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetHEAL THE BAY: $18,170 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetSEEN AND HEARD: $16,247 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetAIM Youth Mental Health: $9,281 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetCOLOR THE WATER: $8,632 over 1y, 8.3% of budgetCENTRAL CITY NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERS: $8,499 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe 5 Gyres Institute: $8,420 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetHILINSKI'S HOPE INC: $8,340 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $8,016 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWOMENS GLOBAL EMPOWERMENT FUND: $6,248 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetWESTSIDE FOOD BANK: $3,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTREVOR PROJECT INC: $538 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Paypal Charitable Giv…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Paypal Charitable Giving FundDC8.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Gnarwhal Community Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Gnarwhal Community Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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.

    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 18 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 Gnarwhal’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