Skip to content
India Phillips Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

India Phillips 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.

$31k
Granted FY2023
2
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$13k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Human Services$242kEducation$122kHousing & Shelter$33kAnimals$3kPhilanthropy$2kFood & Nutrition$2kHealth$1kRecreation & Sports$756Other$0
02FY2023 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $25,434, the rows itemized in this filing. The $31,103 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $5,669 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.
$12,717
Median grant
1
States reached
$22k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CRISIS HOUSE$12,717
CRISIS HOUSE$12,717
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–23, $199k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%SAY SAN DIEGO: $4k → 11%CRISIS HOUSE: $39k → 11%CRISIS HOUSE: $36k → 11%CRISIS HOUSE: $30k → 11%CRISIS HOUSE: $26k → 11%CRISIS HOUSE: $22k → 11%CRISIS HOUSE: $15k → 11%CRISIS HOUSE: $13k → 11%Crisis House: $9k → 11%CRISIS HOUSE: $1k → 11%Crisis House: $750 → 11%BUILD HOPE: $3k → 11%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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$217k · 4 repeat orgs$68k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +137% since the first grant, against +41% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2023, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
16

Total granted

$217k
$68k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+137%
+41%

Still filing today

50%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
Human ServicesFood & NutritionHousing & ShelterAnimalsRecreation & SportsPhilanthropyOther
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

  • CH
    CRISIS HOUSE
    7× · 2017–2023 · $205k · revenue +137%
  • SN
    SPARROWS NEST
    3× · 2019–2021 · $11k
  • ED
    EMILY DAHL FOUNDATION
    2× · 2019–2020 · $1k

Funded once

  • CH
    CRISIS HOUSE1034 NORTH MAGNOLIA
    one grant, 2017 · $31k
  • YC
    YMCA CORTEZ HILL FAMILY SHELTER
    one grant, 2017 · $16k
  • SA
    SOCIAL ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH SAN DIEGO INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $4k · revenue +41%
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
The Reed Foundation
Philanthropy
2
House of Hope

We assist young mothers with housing and wrap around services.

Human Services
3
Solida Foundation
—
4
House of Hope

Assisting and housing females in recovery

—
5
Housing Help of San Diego

The specific purpose of Housing Help of San Diego (HHOSD) is to provide supportive services and tailored solutions with a goal of obtaining and maintaining affordable housing.

Housing & Shelter
6
The Reid Family Foundation
Arts & Culture
7
Homes for Change
Human Services
8
Bethany House Services Inc

Bethany house services empowers homeless and at-risk families with the solutions to achieve housing stability and long-term self-sufficiency.

Housing & Shelter
9
Home Sweet Hope
Philanthropy
10
Saw Foundation
Philanthropy
11
House of Hope

Treating substance use disorders, rebuilding lives, strengthening families, and empowering women.

—
12
Sawyer Foundation
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social Advocates for Youth San Diego Inc; the most unlike its peers is Reed Foundation Inc. 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

9 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. 9 of the 20 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CRISIS HOUSE: $204,727 · Human ServicesCRISIS HOUSE+2 more: $6,777 · Human ServicesCRISIS HOUSE1034 NORTH MAGNOLIA: $30,711 · OtherCRISIS HOUSE1034 NORTH…YMCA CORTEZ HILL FAMILY SHELTER: $15,734 · OtherYMCA CORTEZ HILL FAMIL…SAY SAN DIEGO8755 AERO DRIVE 100: $3,777 · OtherSAY SAN DIEGO8755 AERO…BUILD HOPE120 STEVENS AVE: $3,000 · Other+8 more: $4,367 · Other+8 moreSPARROWS NEST: $10,500 · Housing & ShelterWILLIAM HOLDEN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $2,700 · AnimalsMOVE FOR HUNGER INC: $1,500 · Food & NutritionSalute to Military Golf Association Inc: $756 · Recreation & SportsReed Foundation Inc: $100 · Philanthropy
Human Services$211,504Other$57,589Housing & Shelter$10,500Animals$2,700Food & Nutrition$1,500Recreation & Sports$756Philanthropy$100

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCRISIS HOUSE: $204,727 over 7y, 2.1% of budgetSOCIAL ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH SAN DIEGO INC: $3,777 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBUILD HOPE INC: $3,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetWILLIAM HOLDEN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $2,700 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMOVE FOR HUNGER INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSalute to Military Golf Association Inc: $756 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetREED ACADEMY: $250 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 CRISIS HOUSE ↗
  • Who funds SPARROWS NEST ↗
  • Who funds SOCIAL ADVOCATES FOR YOUTH SAN DIEGO INC ↗
  • Who funds BUILD HOPE INC ↗
  • Who funds WILLIAM HOLDEN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MOVE FOR HUNGER INC ↗
  • Who funds Salute to Military Golf Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds REED ACADEMY ↗
  • Who funds Reed Foundation Inc ↗

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 IncDE5.8× 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 India Phillips Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from India Phillips Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    3get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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.

    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 20 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record but names no grant recipient in the published copy, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on India Phillips’ 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