Skip to content
Jk Irwin Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Jk Irwin Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$56k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Education$179kPhilanthropy$105kHealth$77kPublic Benefit$68kRecreation & Sports$55kCrime & Legal$51kCivil Rights$47kArts & Culture$9kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k5 grants · $21k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $35k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$449k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SF STATE FOUNDATION$25,000
CITY SURF PROJECT$10,000
Uncommon Law$5,000
DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE$5,000
UC BERKELEY FOUNDATION$5,000
HEADLANDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS$3,000
VOICE FOR PROGRAM ED FUND$2,500
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 (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 33% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HEADLANDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $3k → 8%Uncommon Law: $5k → 10%Democracy Alliance: $23k → 14%Uncommon Law: $5k → 10%SF COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVISORS: $5k → 10%Democracy Alliance: $15k → 14%Prison University Project: $10k → 8%Uncommon Law: $5k → 10%LIBERTY HILL FOUNDATION: $5k → 14%Democracy Alliance: $15k → 14%Prison University Project: $10k → 8%Uncommon Law: $5k → 10%UC HASTINGS FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%Democracy Alliance: $15k → 14%Prison University Project: $5k → 8%Uncommon Law: $5k → 10%TIDES FOUNDATION: $30k → 10%DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE: $20k → 17%Prison University Project: $5k → 8%Legal Services for Prisoners with C: $5k → 10%TIDES FOUNDATION: $25k → 10%DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE: $20k → 17%UC BERKELEY FOUNDATION: $5k → 10%TIDES FOUNDATION: $23k → 10%DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE: $15k → 17%Legal Services for Prisoners with C: $5k → 10%TIDES FOUNDATION: $23k → 10%DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE: $15k → 17%UC BERKELEY FOUNDATION: $5k → 10%SF STATE FOUNDATION: $25k → 10%DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE: $5k → 17%ELLA BAKER CENTER: $10k → 10%SF STATE FOUNDATION: $25k → 10%ELLA BAKER CENTER: $5k → 10%SF STATE FOUNDATION: $25k → 10%THE NEW PRESS: $5k → 17%ELLA BAKER CENTER: $5k → 10%SF STATE FOUNDATION: $25k → 10%American Civil Liberties Union Foun: $10k → 17%SF STATE FOUNDATION: $25k → 10%American Civil Liberties Union Foun: $5k → 17%CITY SURF PROJECT: $15k → 10%American Civil Liberties Union Foun: $5k → 17%CITY SURF PROJECT: $10k → 10%American Civil Liberties Union Foun: $5k → 17%CITY SURF PROJECT: $10k → 10%CITY SURF PROJECT: $10k → 10%CITY SURF PROJECT: $10k → 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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 15% of Jk Irwin Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Jk Irwin Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$460k · 14 repeat orgs$29k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +86% since the first grant, against +18% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
9

Total granted

$460k
$27k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+86%
+18%

Still filing today

71%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EducationCivil RightsArts & CultureHealthRecreation & SportsCrime & 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

  • CS
    City Surf Project
    5× · 2020–2024 · $55k · revenue +86%
  • AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2020–2023 · $25k · revenue +65%
  • UL
    UNCOMMON LAW
    5× · 2020–2024 · $25k · revenue +109%

Funded once

  • UL
    UC LAW SF FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +33%
  • TN
    THE NEW PRESS INC
    one grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue -38%
  • SC
    SF COURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVISORS
    one grant, 2023 · $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

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
San Francisco Pretrial Diversion Project Inc

Court diversion programs as an alternative to traditional criminal justice processing of offenders which includes education, employment, information and other services.

—
2
California Western School of Law

California western school of law is an independent, aba/aals and wasc senior college and university commission (wscuc) accredited s.d. law school that prepares graduates for the practice of law through a carefully sequenced program of…

Education
3
Trial Impact Project

Advancing social justice by focusing on groundbreaking trial work and innovative collaboration across private, public and academic sectors. Our trial lawyers, veterans of historic cases, work closely with the next generation of leaders in…

Crime & Legal
4
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
5
Jobs with Justice San Francisco

A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…

Employment
6
Aclu Foundation of Southern California

See schedule o for detailsthe organization defends the civil liberties enshrined in the us constitution and the bill of rights through litigation, policy advocacy, media advocacy, and organizing. it fights to secure and protect the civil…

Civil Rights
7
American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California

The american civil liberties union of northern california (aclu nc union) defends and advances the principles of freedom, equality and justice contained in the united states constitution. aclu nc union, a california mutual benefit…

—
8
Alliance for Safety and Justice

Just safe's mission is to educate the public about the needs of communities most impacted by crime, violence, and incarceration; and promote new safety solutions through community-building, leadership development, grassroots mobilization,…

Crime & Legal
9
California Changelawyers

To build a better justice system for all californians.

Social Science
10
Justice Innovation Inc

The center for justice innovation is a non-profit organization that works to create a fair, effective, and humane justice system and build strong, thriving communities.

Crime & Legal
11
American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Northern California Inc

The american civil liberties union foundation of northern california (aclu nc foundation) defends and advances the principles of freedom, equality and justice contained in the united states constitution. aclu nc foundation, a california…

—
12
Accountable Justice Action Fund

The association supports and promotes criminal justice reform via public education, advocacy, donor advising and grant making. our core programmatic areas are grants and donor advising.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Sentencing Project; the most unlike its peers is Mend Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

18 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. 18 of the 26 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/18
Grantees still filing
11/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SF STATE FOUNDATION: $125,000 · OtherSF STATE FOUNDATIONDEMOCRACY ALLIANCE: $67,500 · OtherDEMOCRACY ALLIANCELegal Services for Prisoners with C: $10,000 · OtherTHE SENTENCING PROJECT: $10,000 · OtherUC BERKELEY FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Other+9 more: $20,700 · Other+9 moreTIDES FOUNDATION: $100,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATIONLIBERTY HILL FOUNDATION: $5,000 · PhilanthropyDRUG POLICY ALLIANCE: $75,000 · HealthDRUG POLICY AL…City Surf Project: $55,000 · Recreation & SportsCity Surf …AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 · Civil RightsELLA BAKER CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS: $20,000 · Civil RightsPREGNANCY JUSTICE INC: $2,000 · Civil RightsPRISON UNIVERSITY PROJECT INC DBA MOUNT TAMALPAIS COLLEGE: $30,000 · EducationUC LAW SF FOUNDATION: $10,000 · EducationWILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC: $2,500 · Education+1 more: $1,000 · EducationUNCOMMON LAW: $25,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$243,200Philanthropy$105,000Health$75,000Recreation & Sports$55,000Civil Rights$47,000Education$43,500Crime & Legal$25,000

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 budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetDRUG POLICY ALLIANCE: $75,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCity Surf Project: $55,000 over 5y, 3.0% of budgetPRISON UNIVERSITY PROJECT INC DBA MOUNT TAMALPAIS COLLEGE: $30,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUNCOMMON LAW: $25,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetELLA BAKER CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS: $20,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetTHE SENTENCING PROJECT: $10,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetUC LAW SF FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetLIBERTY HILL FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NEW PRESS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHEADLANDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $4,200 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWILLIAM J BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPREGNANCY JUSTICE INC: $2,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHEALTHRIGHT 360: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO DAY SCHOOL: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY PARTNERS: $1,000 over 2y, 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.

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.

Silicon Valley Commun…The San Francisco Fou…ImpactassetsincJewish Community Fede…Tides FoundationThe Chicago Community…The James Irvine Foun…The William & Flora H…Marin Community Found…Amalgamated Charitabl…Morgan Stanley Global…Gs Donor Advised Phil…
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA17× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Tides Foundation · The Chicago Community Trust · The James Irvine Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc

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 Jk Irwin Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Jk Irwin 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%1%3%4%5%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 · 0–5%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Jk Irwin Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Jk Irwin 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 26 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Jk Irwin’s 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