Skip to content

· Private foundation

International Children's Dream Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$36k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$21k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$285kFood & Nutrition$269kPhilanthropy$75kHuman Services$32kEducation$5kRecreation & Sports$5k
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $5k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $31k
$10,075
Median grant
1
States reached
$542k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HANDS ACROSS THE VALLEY$21,000
THE FAMILY TRUST CO NAPA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES$10,075
ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL$5,000
REDWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL$200
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%QUEEN OF THE VALLEY FOUNDATION: $103k → 9%ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL: $5k → 10%BRADY FOUNDATION: $25k → 9%NAPA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $26k → 9%BRADY FOUNDATION: $25k → 9%NAPA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $25k → 9%BRADY FOUNDATION: $25k → 9%NAPA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $25k → 9%QUEEN OF THE VALLEY FOUNDATION: $24k → 9%QUEEN OF THE VALLEY FOUNDATION: $20k → 9%QUEEN OF THE VALLEY FOUNDATION: $16k → 9%QUEEN OF THE VALLEY FOUNDATION: $14k → 9%QUEEN OF THE VALLEY FOUNDATION: $11k → 9%NAPA FOOD BANK: $10k → 9%QUEEN OF THE VALLEY FOUNDATION: $6k → 9%NAPA FOOD BANK: $5k → 9%BROWNS VALLEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL: $5k → 9%NAPA FOOD BANK: $4k → 9%SHANNON LEMIEUX MEMORIAL FUND: $1k → 9%SHANNON LEMIEUX MEMORIAL FUND: $1k → 9%SHANNON LEMIEUX MEMORIAL FUND: $1k → 9%SHANNON LEMIEUX MEMORIAL FUND: $1k → 9%SHANNON LEMIEUX MEMORIAL FUND: $1k → 9%REDWOOD MIDDLE SCHOOL: $200 → 9%THE FAMILY TRUST CO NAPA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES: $10k → 9%THE FAMILY TRUST CO NAPA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES: $10k → 9%TEENS CONNECT: $10k → 9%THE FAMILY TRUST CO NAPA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES: $1k → 9%COPE FAMILY CENTER: $1k → 9%THE FAMILY TRUST CO NAPA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES: $1k → 9%THE FAMILY TRUST CO NAPA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES: $1k → 9%COPE FAMILY CENTER: $1k → 9%THE FAMILY TRUST CO NAPA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES: $1k → 9%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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$651k · 9 repeat orgs$20k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
2

Total granted

$651k
$15k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-10%
+30%

Still filing today

44%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
Food & NutritionHealthEducationCrime & LegalOther
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

  • HA
    HANDS ACROSS THE VALLEY INC GEORGE ALTAMURA SR
    8× · 2017–2025 · $250k · revenue -6% · 40% of their budget
  • QO
    QUEEN OF THE VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION
    7× · 2017–2024 · $194k · revenue -15%
  • NM
    NAPA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION
    3× · 2017–2019 · $76k · revenue -10%

Funded once

  • TC
    Teens Connect
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +30%
  • BV
    BROWNS VALLEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
    one grant, 2018 · $5k
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 13 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
4/7
Grantees still filing
2/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HANDS ACROSS THE VALLEY INC GEORGE ALTAMURA SR: $250,150 · Food & NutritionHANDS ACROSS THE VALLEY INC GEORGE ALTAMUR…NAPA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $76,000 · OtherNAPA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATIONBRADY FOUNDATION: $75,000 · OtherBRADY FOUNDATIONTHE FAMILY TRUST CO NAPA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES: $24,205 · OtherTHE FAMILY TRUST CO NAPA COUNTY HUMAN…NAPA FOOD BANK: $19,000 · OtherNAPA FOOD BANKTeens Connect: $10,000 · Other+4 more: $16,265 · Other+4 moreQUEEN OF THE VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $193,565 · HealthQUEEN OF THE VALLEY MEDICAL CENT…SHANNON NICOLE LEMIEUX MEMORIAL FUND: $5,000 · EducationCope Family Center: $2,000 · Crime & Legal
Food & Nutrition$250,150Other$220,470Health$193,565Education$5,000Crime & Legal$2,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetHANDS ACROSS THE VALLEY INC GEORGE ALTAMURA SR: $250,150 over 8y, 40% of budgetQUEEN OF THE VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $193,565 over 7y, 1.7% of budgetNAPA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $76,000 over 3y, 6.9% of budgetBRADY FOUNDATION: $75,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetTeens Connect: $10,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetSHANNON NICOLE LEMIEUX MEMORIAL FUND: $5,000 over 5y, 5.2% of budgetCope Family Center: $2,000 over 2y, 0.1% 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 HANDS ACROSS THE VALLEY INC GEORGE ALTAMURA SR ↗
  • Who funds QUEEN OF THE VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NAPA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BRADY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Teens Connect ↗
  • Who funds SHANNON NICOLE LEMIEUX MEMORIAL FUND ↗
  • Who funds Cope Family Center ↗

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.

The Woods Charitable FoundationPA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Woods Charitable Foundation · Craig and Kathryn Hall Foundation · Community Foundation of the Napa Valley · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 International Children's Dream Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from International Children's Dream Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–5%
    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 13 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on International Children's Dream’s filings →

    More from the funding graph