· Private foundation
Harbaugh George & Betty Charitable Foundation
Its FY2018 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 clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2018.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2018
- Under $10k1 grant · $6k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $171k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $300k
- $250k+3 grants · $52M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| G HARBAUGH FOUNDATION | $51,201,657 |
| SOCIAL IMPACT FUND | $320,000 |
| PROJECT HEALING WATERS FLY FISHING | $300,000 |
| EMERIL LAGASSE FOUNDATION | $125,000 |
| JESSIE REES FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| SOCIAL GOOD FUND | $75,000 |
| IAN WALSH MENEHUNE MAYHEM FOUNDATIO | $40,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $36,000 |
| MAUI FOOD BANK | $25,000 |
| CARDIFF BY THE SEA | $20,000 |
| SOLID ROCK | $15,000 |
| THE CENTURY CLUB | $15,000 |
| PROTEUS ACADEMY INC | $10,415 |
| SOUL SURVIVOR OUTDOOR | $10,000 |
| EDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATION | $6,000 |
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 (FY17–18, $104k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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 +125% since the first grant, against +48% for the ones you funded once.
7 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2018, 0 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (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 FY2018, 1% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $52M 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
- TETHE EMERIL LAGASSE FOUNDATION2× · 2017–2018 · $245k · revenue +125%
- JRJessie Rees Foundation2× · 2017–2018 · $190k · revenue +40%
- ECEDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATION2× · 2017–2018 · $104k · revenue +863%
Funded once
- FOFestival of Children Foundationone grant, 2017 · $200k · revenue -11%
CULINARY INSTITUTE OF AMERICAgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $200k · revenue +29%- XPX PRIZE FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $142k · revenue +72%
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.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Edward Charles Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Open Gate International. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 15 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
25 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. 25 of the 37 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 G HARBAUGH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Social Impact Fund ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HEALING WATERS FLY FISHING INC ↗
- Who funds THE EMERIL LAGASSE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Festival of Children Foundation ↗
- Who funds CULINARY INSTITUTE OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds Jessie Rees Foundation ↗
- Who funds X PRIZE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds EDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Starkey Hearing Foundation ↗
- Who funds OPEN GATE INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
- Who funds IAN WALSH MENEHUNE MAYHEM FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SIMA ENVIRONMENTAL FUND ↗
- Who funds PROTEUS ACADEMY INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF BETHANY HAMILTON INC DBATHE BEAUTIFULLYFLAWED FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SHASTA TRINITY FLY FISHERS INC ↗
- Who funds MAUI FOOD BANK INC ↗
- Who funds ORANGEWOOD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE HONOR FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SOUL SURVIVOR OUTDOOR ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF SONOMA COUNTY ↗
- Who funds SUPPORT THE ENLISTED PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds MONTANA PRESERVATION ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds WILLOW GROVE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
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: G Harbaugh Foundation · The Stanley E Hanson Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · National Philanthropic Trust · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Endowment Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Network for Good · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc
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 Harbaugh George & Betty Charitable 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.
- Project Healing Waters Fly Fishing Inc — 46% of income from government
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 Harbaugh George & Betty Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Harbaugh George & Betty Charitable 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.