Skip to content

· Private foundation

HELTS 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.

$94k
Granted FY2017
10
Grants FY2017
3
States reached
$25k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

95% of HELTS Foundation’s FY2018 grant dollars went to Marin Community Foundation, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2018 names 5 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2017, the last year HELTS Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $94k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

5
’17
5
’18

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0191% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2018.

Philanthropy$1.6MArts & Culture$40kEducation$40kHuman Services$25kYouth Development$20kCrime & Legal$5kInternational$4kEmployment$3kOther$0
02FY2017 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2017

  • Under $10k4 grants · $9k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $85k
$10,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$25k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$25,000
The Contemp Jewish Museum$20,000
Jewish Fam Children's Serv$10,000
Tulane University$10,000
George Mason University Foundation$10,000
Alive Free fka Omega Boys Club$10,000
San Francisco Court Appointed Spec$2,500
Tiba Foundation$2,500
Jewish Vocational Service$2,500
San Francisco Food Bank$1,000
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 (FY17–18) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 99% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%Marin Community Foundation: $1.6M → 8%Tiba Foundation: $3k → 10%Congregation Emanuel-el: $3k → 10%George Mason University Foundation: $10k → 6%Nature Conservancy: $350 → 7%Tulane University: $10k → 23%Marin Community Foundation: $32k → 8%Tiba Foundation: $1k → 10%Jewish Vocational Service: $3k → 10%George Mason University Foundation: $10k → 6%Tulane University: $10k → 23%The Contemp Jewish Museum: $20k → 10%The Contemp Jewish Museum: $20k → 10%Alive Free fka Omega Boys Club: $10k → 10%Alive Free fka Omega Boys Club: $10k → 10%San Francisco Food Bank: $1k → 10%San Francisco Food Bank: $1k → 10%Jewish Fam Children's Serv: $15k → 10%Jewish Fam Children's Serv: $10k → 10%San Francisco Court Appointed Spec: $3k → 10%San Francisco Court Appointed Spec: $3k → 10%Jewish Community Federation of SF M: $11k → 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.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$136k · 8 repeat orgs$41k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2017, 0 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2017 (too recent to call). Read against FY2017, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
4

Total granted

$136k
$41k

Still filing today

63%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2018, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $14k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18
EducationArts & CultureInternationalOther
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

  • TA
    THE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND
    2× · 2017–2018 · $20k · revenue +72%
  • GM
    GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $20k · revenue +37%
  • TF
    Tiba Foundation
    2× · 2017–2018 · $4k · revenue +230%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • JC
    Jewish Community Federation of SF M
    one grant, 2018 · $11k
  • JV
    Jewish Vocational Service
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 14 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
6/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,625,194 · PhilanthropyMARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONJewish Fam Children's Serv: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherAlive Free fka Omega Boys Club: $20,000 · OtherJewish Community Federation of SF M: $11,000 · OtherSan Francisco Court Appointed Spec: $5,000 · Other+4 more: $7,350 · OtherTHE CONTEMPORARY JEWISH MUSEUM: $40,000 · Arts & CultureTHE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND: $20,000 · EducationGEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 · EducationTiba Foundation: $3,500 · International
Philanthropy$1,625,194Other$93,350Arts & Culture$40,000Education$40,000International$3,500

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,625,194 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTHE CONTEMPORARY JEWISH MUSEUM: $40,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetTHE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC: $20,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTiba Foundation: $3,500 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $350 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.

  • Who funds MARIN COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE CONTEMPORARY JEWISH MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds THE ADMINISTRATORS OF THE TULANE EDUCATIONAL FUND ↗
  • Who funds GEORGE MASON UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Tiba Foundation ↗
  • Who funds SAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization HELTS Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from HELTS Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s 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 · 0–25%
    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 HELTS Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to HELTS 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.

    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 14 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 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on HELTS’ filings →

    More from the funding graph