· Private foundation
Grace US
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $248k
- $50k–250k4 grants · $335k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EBEAUTY COMMUNITY INC | $150,000 |
| CANCER RESOURCE CNTRS OF MENDOCINO | $75,000 |
| TREES FOUNDATION | $60,000 |
| COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES | $50,000 |
| HEART OF THE REDWOODS COMMUNITY | $39,390 |
| Individual grant recipient | $36,000 |
| ABODE CONTEMPLATIVE CARE FOR THE DY | $25,000 |
| COASTAL HEADWATERS ASSOCIATION | $25,000 |
| SANCTUARY FOREST | $20,000 |
| RECYLCLED YOUTH | $20,000 |
| NORTH BAY ROWING CLUB | $19,780 |
| REVIVE & THRIVE PROJECT | $18,000 |
| CERES COMMUNITY PROJECT | $18,000 |
| FRIENDS OF LOST COAST | $16,100 |
| MATTOLE RESTORATION COUNCIL | $10,240 |
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 (FY17–24, $913k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 51% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
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 +99% since the first grant, against +31% for the ones you funded once.
24 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $91k 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
- ECEBEAUTY COMMUNITY INC8× · 2017–2024 · $450k · revenue +212% · 27% of their budget
- NBNORTH BAY ROWING CLUB8× · 2017–2024 · $290k · revenue +8% · 28% of their budget
- HOHeart of the Redwoods Community Hospice8× · 2017–2024 · $216k · revenue +21%
Funded once
- SHSOUTHERN HUMBOLDT COMMUNITY HEALTHone grant, 2022 · $100k
- TSTHE SANCTUARYone grant, 2022 · $43k
- PSPetaluma Small Craft Centergraduatedone grant, 2022 · $40k · revenue +31% · 41% of their budget
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.
At Yosemite Rivers Alliance, we unite conservation and community to protect and restore the three rivers that ?ow through the Yosemite Regionthe Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and Merced.
To conserve lands for recreational, educational, ecological, agricultural, scenic & open space opportunities. We develop & maintain public access ways & trails to the ocean, rivers & other natural or scenic features along coastal Mendocino…
Canopy collaborates with communities to grow and sustain equitable urban forests for all
Sonoma County Conservation Action's mission is to better our quality of life in Sonoma County for all generations, through educating and directly engaging the public on local environmental issues and policies using grassroots organizing.
California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.
To empower communities to collaborate in monitoring the ecological conditions of the Eel River. To share information about the health of the watershed and to work together to formulate a restoration strategy.
Homes for Sonoma is a nonprofit developer creating quality workforce housing options that support safe and sustainable community, and finds efficient, scalable solutions to address the housing crisis in Sonoma County and throughout…
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…
CWC is pursuing its mission of protecting and preserving coastal watersheds through a strategic focus on the lower San Lorenzo River, transforming the river into a treasured community asset and destination that Santa Cruz is proud of.
To conserve and restore valuable natural resources of Mendocino County Region. Dedicated to providing public access to the coast & protecting working farmlands, forests, wildlife habitat, open space, scenic vistas & watersheds.
The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sanctuary Forest Inc and the most unlike its peers is Abode Contemplative Care. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
19 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. 19 of the 36 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 EBEAUTY COMMUNITY INC ↗
- Who funds CANCER RESOURCE CENTERS OF MENDO CO ↗
- Who funds NORTH BAY ROWING CLUB ↗
- Who funds Heart of the Redwoods Community Hospice ↗
- Who funds SANCTUARY FOREST INC ↗
- Who funds THE CERES COMMUNITY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds CREATIVE SANCTUARY ↗
- Who funds ABODE CONTEMPLATIVE CARE ↗
- Who funds Revive & Thrive Project ↗
- Who funds MATTOLE RESTORATION COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds Trees Foundation ↗
- Who funds Court Appointed Special Advocates ↗
- Who funds COASTAL HEADWATERS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds River Town Racers ↗
- Who funds University of Arizona Foundation ↗
- Who funds LIGHTHOUSE WRITERS WORKSHOP INC ↗
- Who funds Petaluma Small Craft Center ↗
- Who funds PTA CALIFORNIA CONGRESS OF PARENTS TEACHERS & STUDENTS INC ↗
- Who funds LIVE OAK FOUNDATION 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: Humboldt Area Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Grace US 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Grace US?
Find your warmest path to Grace US 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.