Skip to content

· Private foundation

James L White Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$63k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$10k
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.

Human Services$203kHealth$166kArts & Culture$96kHousing & Shelter$44kEducation$33kYouth Development$2k
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k10 grants · $43k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$561k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SAN ANTONIO REGIONAL HOSPITAL WOMENS BREAST & IMAGING CENTER$10,000
CHAFFEY COMMUNITY OF ARTS$10,000
OPARC$8,000
PACIFIC LIFELINE$5,000
WEST END AUXILIARY OF CHILDREN'S FUND$5,000
ONTARIO CHRISTIAN SCHOOL$5,000
VNA HOSPICE & PALLIATIVE CARE OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA$5,000
HOUSE OF RUTH INC$5,000
MEGAN'S WINGS INC$3,000
AGINGNEXT INC$3,000
CROSSROADS INC$2,000
SERVICE CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIFE$2,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–25, $117k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%HOUSE OF RUTH INC: $5k → 14%HOUSE OF RUTH INC: $2k → 14%HOUSE OF RUTH INC: $2k → 14%HOUSE OF RUTH INC: $2k → 14%TRAVELERS AID OF THE INLAND EMPIRE: $1k → 14%HOUSE OF RUTH INC: $5k → 14%TRAVELERS AID OF THE INLAND EMPIRE: $1k → 14%SHOES THAT FIT: $5k → 14%SHOES THAT FIT: $4k → 14%SHOES THAT FIT: $4k → 14%SHOES THAT FIT: $4k → 14%SHOES THAT FIT: $4k → 14%SHOES THAT FIT: $4k → 14%SHOES THAT FIT: $4k → 14%AGINGNEXT INC: $3k → 14%AGINGNEXT INC: $3k → 14%AGINGNEXT INC: $3k → 14%AGINGNEXT INC: $3k → 14%SERVICE CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIFE: $2k → 14%SERVICE CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIFE: $2k → 14%OPARC: $8k → 14%OPARC: $7k → 14%OPARC: $7k → 14%OPARC: $7k → 14%OPARC: $5k → 14%OPARC: $5k → 14%OPARC: $5k → 14%OPARC: $5k → 14%OPARC: $5k → 14%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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$519k · 21 repeat orgs$25k to everyone else

21 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
4

Total granted

$519k
$25k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+159%

Still filing today

62%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Human ServicesHealthYouth DevelopmentEducationOther
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

  • O
    OPARC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $54k · revenue +58%
  • ST
    SHOES THAT FIT
    7× · 2017–2024 · $29k · revenue +149%
  • LI
    LMWS INC
    5× · 2018–2025 · $23k · revenue +130%

Funded once

  • FO
    FRIENDS OF THE ONTARIO CHAFFEY COMMUNITY SHOW BAND
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
  • AW
    AVON WALK FOR BREAST CANCER
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • LK
    Leaven Kidsgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $3k · revenue +159%
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
Survivors Inc

Survivor's ince. provides responsive, comprehensive, confidential and client driven and client focused services to those experiencing sexual abuse, domestic violence, human trafficking and stalking. the services provided include: a fully…

—
2
The Center for Women and Children in Crisis

Provide a caring, advocating, safe, and educationally based environment for survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault.

Health
3
Residential Services Inc

Residential Services, Inc. provides living options and related supports to people with intellectual and developmental disabilities of all ages.

Health
4
Westcare California Inc

To provide substance abuse prevention & treatment.

Health
5
Domestic Violence Intervention Services

See schedule oadvancing physical and emotional safety by reducing the impact and occurrence of sexual and domestic violence, human trafficking and stalking through inclusive intervention and prevention services for children, youth, and…

Human Services
6
Chances & Changes Inc

To operate residential and non-residential programs for victims of domestic violence.

—
7
Crossroads for Women

The crossroads provides housing and intensive support services for women with co-occurring mental and addictive disorders working towards self sufficiency. all clients have a diagnosis appropriate for comprehensive community support…

Crime & Legal
8
Familylinks Inc

Familylinks is one of the pittsburgh area's largest and most comprehensive human service providers. serving the most vulnerable members of our community, familylinks provides services in mental health, substance use, service coordination,…

Human Services
9
Woman Inc

W.O.M.A.N., Inc. supports survivors of domestic violence and their loved ones along their healing journeys, bridging value rich networks designed to address intersections of violence. In all our work, we strive to continually increase our…

Health
10
Family Services of Tulare County Inc

The mission of Family Services is to help children, adults, and families throughout Tulare County heal from violence and thrive in healthy relationships. Family Services will accomplish this mission through direct services, advocacy,…

Human Services
11
Women's Aid Service Inc

To provide safety and empowerment to victims of domestic violence and sexual assault and to work to eliminate sexual victimization and domestic violence through shelter, treatment, education and social change.

Crime & Legal
12
Inland Temporary Homes

Aims to reduce countywide homelessness while addressing each family's personal struggle with perpetuating homelessness and poverty in their children. Provides both transitional shelter and rapid re-housing options in addition to…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Project Sister Family Services; the most unlike its peers is Crossroads 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

14 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. 14 of the 25 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)
14/14
Grantees still filing
10/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SAN ANTONIO REGIONAL HOSPITAL WOMENS BREAST & IMAGING CENTER: $80,000 · OtherSAN ANTONIO REGIONAL HOSPITAL WOMENS BREAST & IMAGING CENTERCHAFFEY COMMUNITY OF ARTS: $66,000 · OtherCHAFFEY COMMUNITY OF ARTSONTARIO CHRISTIAN SCHOOL: $30,000 · OtherONTARIO CHRISTIAN SCHOOLWEST END AUXILIARY OF CHILDREN'S FUND: $25,000 · OtherWEST END AUXILIARY OF CHILDREN'S FUNDINLAND VALLEY COUNCIL OF CHURCHES: $24,000 · OtherINLAND VALLEY COUNCIL OF CHURCHESLMWS INC: $22,900 · OtherLMWS INCFOOTHILL FAMILY SHELTER INC: $21,000 · OtherFOOTHILL FAMILY SHELTER INCWEST END YMCA: $20,000 · OtherWEST END YMCAANTHONY MUNOZ HALL OF FAME FOUNDATION: $20,000 · OtherANTHONY MUNOZ HALL OF FAME FOUNDATIONVNA HOSPICE & PALLATIVE CARE OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $14,000 · Other+5 more: $39,000 · Other+5 moreOPARC: $54,000 · Human ServicesOPARCSHOES THAT FIT: $29,000 · Human ServicesSHOES THAT FITHOUSE OF RUTH INC: $16,000 · Human ServicesHOUSE OF RUTH INCAGINGNEXT INC: $12,000 · Human ServicesAGINGNEXT INCService Center for Independent Life: $4,000 · Human Services+1 more: $2,000 · Human ServicesMEGAN'S WINGS INC: $33,000 · Youth DevelopmentVNACARE: $15,000 · HealthCROSSROADS INC: $14,000 · HealthLeaven Kids: $3,000 · Education
Other$361,900Human Services$117,000Youth Development$33,000Health$29,000Education$3,000

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 budgetOPARC: $54,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetMEGAN'S WINGS INC: $33,000 over 8y, 1.9% of budgetSHOES THAT FIT: $29,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetLMWS INC: $22,900 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetFOOTHILL FAMILY SHELTER INC: $21,000 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetWEST END YMCA: $20,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetHOUSE OF RUTH INC: $16,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetVNACARE: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetCROSSROADS INC: $14,000 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetAGINGNEXT INC: $12,000 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetPROJECT SISTER FAMILY SERVICES: $6,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetService Center for Independent Life: $4,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTravelers Aid of the Inland Empire: $2,000 over 2y, 1.5% 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 OPARC ↗
  • Who funds MEGAN'S WINGS INC ↗
  • Who funds SHOES THAT FIT ↗
  • Who funds LMWS INC ↗
  • Who funds FOOTHILL FAMILY SHELTER INC ↗
  • Who funds WEST END YMCA ↗
  • Who funds HOUSE OF RUTH INC ↗
  • Who funds VNACARE ↗
  • Who funds CROSSROADS INC ↗
  • Who funds AGINGNEXT INC ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT SISTER FAMILY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds Service Center for Independent Life ↗
  • Who funds Leaven Kids ↗
  • Who funds Travelers Aid of the Inland Empire ↗

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.

Ontario Community FoundationCA26.4× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ontario Community Foundation · Inland Empire Community Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Price Foundation Inc · Inland Empire United Way · The Rose Hills Foundation · Union Pacific Foundation · The Rauch Family Foundation · Majestic Realty Foundation · The Ahmanson Foundation · Shelter Partnership Inc · Weingart 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 James L White Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from James L White 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%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 25 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 James L White’s filings →

    More from the funding graph