Skip to content
Granada Supporters Club at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Granada Supporters Club

Provide support for Granada High School sports and academic groups to allow students to achieve their maximum potential.

$60k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$19k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Education$795kRecreation & Sports$30kArts & Culture$1k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 3 grants below total $43,502, the rows itemized in this filing. The $60,214 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $16,712 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.
$14,006
Median grant
1
States reached
$592k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Livermore High School Athletic Fund$18,661
Parents and Teachers Independent Organization$14,006
Lawrence Elementary PTO$10,835
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%Livermore High School Music Boosters: $42k → 10%Livermore High School Music Boosters: $18k → 10%Junction Avenue k-8 PTA: $11k → 10%Lawrence Elementary PTO: $11k → 10%Lawrence Elementary PTO: $11k → 10%Lawrence Elementary PTO: $11k → 10%Livermore High School Music Boosters: $10k → 10%Junction Avenue k-8 PTA: $9k → 10%Marylin Ave Elementary PTO: $9k → 10%Christensen MS PTA: $6k → 10%Livermore High School Music Boosters: $6k → 10%Lawrence Elementary PTO: $5k → 10%Christensen MS PTA: $1k → 10%Altamont Creek: $330 → 10%Granada High School: $314k → 10%Granada High School: $80k → 10%Granada High School: $79k → 10%Granada High School: $62k → 10%Granada High School: $27k → 10%Livermore High School Athletic Fund: $19k → 10%Livermore High: $17k → 10%Parents and Teachers Independent Organization: $14k → 10%Livermore High School PTSA: $12k → 10%Livermore High School Fund: $9k → 10%Livermore High School PTSA: $8k → 10%William Mendenhall MS PTA: $8k → 10%Livermore High School PTSA: $7k → 10%Livermore High School Athletic Fund: $6k → 10%Livermore High School Athletic Fund: $6k → 10%Livermore joint unified school district: $4k → 10%Emma C Smith Elementary: $1k → 10%Granada High Music Parents: $1k → 10%East Ave MS Booster Assn: $589 → 10%William Mendenhall MS PTA: $460 → 10%Sunset Elementary: $103 → 10%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$791k · 7 repeat orgs$35k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
7

Total granted

$791k
$21k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+45%

Still filing today

71%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $14k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationArts & CultureOther
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

  • LM
    Livermore Music
    4× · 2019–2024 · $76k · revenue +1% · 28% of their budget
  • LE
    LAWRENCE ELEMENTARY PARENT-TEACHER ORGANIZATION
    4× · 2022–2025 · $38k · revenue +144%
  • LH
    LIVERMORE HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC FUND
    3× · 2020–2025 · $30k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • MA
    Marylin Avenue STEAM Academy PTO
    one grant, 2023 · $9k
  • LH
    Livermore High School Fund
    one grant, 2019 · $9k
  • EC
    EMMA C SMITH ELEMENTARY PTAgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue +47%
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
Monta Loma Elementary School Pta

Monta Loma Elementary School PTA is an organization established for fundraising to support our teachers and students

—
2
Pta California Laguna Middle School

Student and teacher support, classroom enrichment and educational supplies.

—
3
Pta California Congress of Parents Teachers & Students Inc

Parent Teacher Organization supporting academic programs and student enrichment events at school.

—
4
Pta California Congress Laguna Niguel Elementary School Pta

Information, advocacy, educational enrichment

—
5
Pta California Congress of Parents Teachers Inc

Parents teacher association-education

—
6
P T a California Congress of Parents Witter Ranch Elementary P T a

provide support and resources to connect parents, teachers, and staff for the benefit of our students.

—
7
Lomarena Elementary Pta

Information, advocacy, educational enrichment

—
8
Pioneer Elem School Pta California

To raise funds to suppliment education

—
9
Pta California Congress of Parents Teachers & Students Inc

The purposes of this Association in common with the purposes of the National PTA and the California State PTA are: 1 To promote the welfare of children and youth in home school places of worship and throughout the community; 2 To raise the…

—
10
Pta California Congress of Parents Sutterville Elementary Pta

Public school

—
11
Pta Ca Congress of Parents Teachers and Students Sam Lawson Middle School Pta

To provide grants for student activities and parent involvement.

—
12
Manzanita Elementary Pta

Educational support

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pta California Congress of Parents Altamont Creek School Pta; the most unlike its peers is Livermore High School Athletic Fund. 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

12 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. 12 of the 15 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Granada High School: $572,460 · OtherGranada High SchoolPTA CALIFORNIA CONGRESS OF PARENTS TEACHERS & STUDENTS INC: $44,645 · OtherPTA CALIFORNIA CONGRESS OF PARENTS TEACHERS & STUDENTS INCLIVERMORE HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETIC FUND: $30,234 · Other+8 more: $54,367 · Other+8 moreLivermore Music: $76,346 · EducationLivermore MusicLAWRENCE ELEMENTARY PARENT-TEACHER ORGANIZATION: $37,916 · EducationLAWRENCE ELEMENT…Marylin Avenue STEAM Academy PTO: $9,210 · EducationMarylin Avenue S…GRANADA MUSIC PARENTS: $1,018 · Arts & Culture
Other$701,706Education$123,472Arts & Culture$1,018

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

25%50%75%100%$100kgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLivermore Music: $76,346 over 4y, 28% of budgetPTA CALIFORNIA CONGRESS OF PARENTS TEACHERS & STUDENTS INC: $44,645 over 4y, 14% of budgetLAWRENCE ELEMENTARY PARENT-TEACHER ORGANIZATION: $37,916 over 4y, 10.0% of budgetPTA CALIF CONGRESS OF PARENTS TEACHERS & STUDENTS INC: $20,805 over 2y, 52% of budgetWILLIAM MENDENHALL MIDDLE SCHOOL PTSA: $8,315 over 2y, 26% of budgetEMMA C SMITH ELEMENTARY PTA: $1,445 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetGRANADA MUSIC PARENTS: $1,018 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetPTA CALIFORNIA CONGRESS OF PARENTS ALTAMONT CREEK SCHOOL PTA: $330 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSUNSET PARENT TEACHER ORGANIZATION: $103 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE4.2× affinity4 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 Granada Supporters Club funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Granada Supporters Club. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%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
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Granada Supporters Club?

    Find your warmest path to Granada Supporters Club 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 15 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Granada Supporters Club’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