· Private foundation
Integral Charitable 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2022–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES FOUNDATION | $7,500 |
| RUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION | $7,500 |
| STANFORD UNIVERSITY | $7,500 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON | $7,500 |
| NORTHWEST INDIAN COLLEGE | $5,000 |
| UC SANTA BARBARA FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| SEATTLE PARKS FOUNDATION | $3,000 |
| GROWING GARDENS | $3,000 |
| BLACK SURF SANTA CRUZ INC | $3,000 |
| SILICON VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATION | $3,000 |
| SANTA BARBARA MARITIME MUSEUM | $3,000 |
| ALASKA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $2,500 |
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN | $2,500 |
| BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF MALIBU | $2,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,500 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY22–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 45% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 +50% since the first grant, against +37% for the ones you funded once.
14 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 14 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 41% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k 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
UC SANTA BARBARA FOUNDATION3× · 2022–2025 · $15k · revenue +216%- SBSANTA BARBARA MARITIME MUSEUM3× · 2023–2025 · $7k · revenue +23%
- GGGROWING GARDENS OF BOULDER COUNTY3× · 2023–2025 · $6k · revenue +50%
Funded once
- UOUniversity of Southern Maine Foundationgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $8k · revenue +45%
Feeding Americaone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue -1%- OAOUTDOOR AFROgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $2k · revenue +55%
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.
California ocean science trust (ost) is a non-profit organization dedicated to accelerating progress towards a healthy and productive ocean future for california. created by state legislation, ost bridges the gap between cutting-edge…
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…
Provide scientific support and tools for decision making and communication through collaborative efforts.
Increase societal understanding of the earth system through scientific research and education.
Golden gate university prepares individuals to lead and serve by providing high quality, practice-based educational programs in law, taxation, business and related professions - as a nonprofit institution - in an innovative and challenging…
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…
The aquarium of the pacific's mission is to instill a sense of wonder, respect, and stewardship for the pacific ocean, its inhabitants, and ecosystems.
Scu is a catholic and jesuit institution that makes student learning its central focus, promotes faculty and staff learning in its various forms, and exhibits organizational learning.
The Marine Biological Laboratory (MBL) is a world-renowned center for biological discovery and training that is notably affiliated with more than 60 Nobel Prize winners. Research is conducted by full-time faculty as well as hundreds of the…
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Uc Santa Barbara Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Hawaii Exemplary State Foundation. 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 26 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
38 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. 38 of the 60 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 UC SANTA BARBARA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RUTGERS UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds University of Southern Maine Foundation ↗
- Who funds COLORADO SCHOOL OF MINES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SANTA BARBARA MARITIME MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds GROWING GARDENS OF BOULDER COUNTY ↗
- Who funds SILICON VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Feeding America ↗
- Who funds HAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST INDIAN COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds Black Surf Santa Cruz Inc ↗
- Who funds SEATTLE PARKS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Environmental Science Center ↗
- Who funds OCEANSWIDE INC ↗
- Who funds ACE MENTOR PROGRAM OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds YWCA BOULDER COUNTY ↗
- Who funds MALIBU FOUNDATION FOR YOUTH AND FAMILIES ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds The Alaska Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds OUTDOOR AFRO ↗
- Who funds GULF OF MAINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Girls Inc of the Pacific Northwest ↗
- Who funds STROUD WATER RESEARCH CENTER ↗
- Who funds Amah Mutsun Land Trust ↗
- Who funds THE FLOWER DISTRICT ↗
- Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF CALIFORNIA'S CENTRAL COAST ↗
- Who funds THE SONORAN INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds MUTUAL AID DISASTER RELIEF INC ↗
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: Patagoniaorg · The San Francisco Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · M J Murdock Charitable Trust · Tides Foundation · Colorado Gives Foundation · Seattle Foundation · The Oregon Community Foundation · California Community Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · Jewish Communal Fund · American Online Giving 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 Integral 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.
- Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc — 11% of income from government
- Girls Inc of the Pacific Northwest — 4% of income from government
- Sea Turtle Conservancy — 1% of income from government
- Rutgers University Foundation — 0% 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 Integral Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Integral 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.