Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Hara 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.

$30k
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What you fund
0197% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Religion$579kEducation$16kInternational$8kHuman Services$6kCivil Rights$5kEnvironment$3kEmployment$2kHousing & Shelter$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k13 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
$1,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$535k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Lake Avenue Church$15,151
Friends Of VAlor International Scho$5,000
InterVarsity Chriatian FellowshipUS$1,500
Naomi House$1,200
Redeemer Community Partnership$1,200
Arborspring Ministries$1,200
Pasadena Community Foundation$1,000
Feeding America$600
San Gabriel Christian School$500
Individual grant recipient$500
International Rescue Committee$500
PBS SoCal$400
Southern California Public Radio$400
National Park Foundation$400
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY21–23, $2k) 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 your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Human Good Foundation: $2k → 14%Human Good Foundation: $500 → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

WA
MN
IL
WI
MI
NY
MA
CA
CO
VA
MD
AZ
NC
DC
GA
FL

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$619k · 23 repeat orgs$21k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +86% since the first grant, against +20% for the ones you funded once.

23 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 17 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

23
17

Total granted

$619k
$11k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+86%
+20%

Still filing today

17%
35%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 64% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Arts & CultureInternationalEnvironmentHuman ServicesHousing & ShelterReligionOther

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

  • WC
    WEST COVINA CHRISTIAN CHURCH
    8× · 2017–2024 · $506k
  • LA
    LAKE AVENUE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH OF PASADENA
    6× · 2017–2025 · $49k
  • SG
    San Gabriel Christian School
    4× · 2022–2025 · $14k

Funded once

  • JA
    Japanese American Citizens League
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
  • BG
    Be Group Foundation
    one grant, 2018 · $2k
  • AP
    Axia Project
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue 0%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
National Geographic Society

To increase and diffuse geographic knowledge in the broadest sense, using the power of science, exploration, education and storytelling to illuminate and protect the wonder of the world.

Education
2
Asociacion Interamericana Para La Defensa Del Ambiente

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.

Crime & Legal
3
Rainforest Alliance Inc

RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.

4
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
5
Actionaid Usa

Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…

Social Science
6
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
7
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
8
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
9
Floresta Usa Incorporated

Plant with purpose, a christian nonprofit organization, reverses deforestation and poverty around the world by transforming the lives of the rural poor. we do this through: - watershed restoration & regenerative agriculture - savings…

International
10
University of Southern California

The central mission of the university of southern california is the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit. the principal means by which our mission is…

Education
11
Rescape California

ReScape addresses climate change by providing a regenerative, nature-based whole systems foundation for landscaping education, workforce development and policy.Foundational to our work is a whole systems watershed framework that…

Environment
12
Partnership for Public Service Inc

Making our government work better is a daunting task, and we are a small organization seeking to transform a government that employs millions of civilians and manages trillions of dollars in taxpayer revenue needed to protect public…

Employment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Los Angeles Mission Inc and the most unlike its peers is Axia Project. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 41 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%5%<5yr15%9%5–10yr20%0%10–20yr17%27%20–35yr11%41%35–55yr13%18%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%1%<5yr15%0%5–10yr20%0%10–20yr17%1%20–35yr11%96%35–55yr13%3%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/22
the rest of the field
14%
26,003/186,956

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.

04the grantee network

16 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 of the 48 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/16
Grantees still filing
7/16
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

WEST COVINA CHRISTIAN CHURCH — $505,972 · OtherWEST COVINA CHRISTIAN CHURCHLAKE AVENUE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH OF PASADENA — $48,651 · OtherLAKE AVENUE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH OF PASADENA+39 more — $77,974 · Other+39 moreHUMANGOOD FOUNDATION WEST — $2,200 · Human ServicesTREEPEOPLE INC — $2,100 · EnvironmentInterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSA — $1,500 · ReligionRedeemer Community Partnership — $1,200 · Youth DevelopmentInternational Rescue Committee INC — $900 · InternationalBRIGHT FUTURES CAMBODIA — $300 · InternationalPasadena Community Foundation — $1,000 · Philanthropy
Other$632,597Human Services$2,200Environment$2,100Religion$1,500Youth Development$1,200International$1,200Philanthropy$1,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetHUMANGOOD FOUNDATION WEST — $2,200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTREEPEOPLE INC — $2,100 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRedeemer Community Partnership — $1,200 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPasadena Community Foundation — $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAxia Project — $1,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC — $900 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFeeding America — $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION — $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPASADENA HUMANE — $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RADIO — $400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGUIDE DOGS OF THE DESERT — $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBRIGHT FUTURES CAMBODIA — $300 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetJAPANESE AMERICAN NATIONAL MUSEUM — $250 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLOS ANGELES MISSION INC — $60 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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 HUMANGOOD FOUNDATION WEST
  • Who funds TREEPEOPLE INC
  • Who funds InterVarsity Christian FellowshipUSA
  • Who funds Redeemer Community Partnership
  • Who funds Pasadena Community Foundation
  • Who funds Axia Project
  • Who funds International Rescue Committee INC
  • Who funds Feeding America
  • Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
  • Who funds PASADENA HUMANE
  • Who funds SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RADIO
  • Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION
  • Who funds GUIDE DOGS OF THE DESERT
  • Who funds BRIGHT FUTURES CAMBODIA
  • Who funds JAPANESE AMERICAN NATIONAL MUSEUM

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.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Hara 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 0%
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 48 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph