Skip to content
John Sperling Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

John Sperling 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.

$3.8M
Granted FY2024still arriving
19
Grants FY2024still arriving
7
States reached
$1.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$8.6MFood & Nutrition$2.6MCivil Rights$1.7MHealth$677kScience & Tech$565kPublic Benefit$430kArts & Culture$276kPublic Safety & Disaster$200kOther$0
02FY2024 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $105k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $850k
  • $250k+5 grants · $2.8M
$100,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$80M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
EARTHJUSTICE$1,000,000
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION$500,000
WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER$500,000
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION$500,000
CENTER FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST$300,000
MULTIDISCIPLINARY ASSOCIATION FOR PSYCHEDELIC STUDIES$125,000
FOOD & WATER WATCH$100,000
CENTER FOR HUMANE TECHNOLOGY$100,000
NATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION$100,000
ISRAAID$100,000
LOS PADRES FORESTWATCH$100,000
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN$100,000
WESTERN RESOURCE ADVOCATES$75,000
ARIZONA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$50,000
GAVIOTA COAST CONSERVANCY$45,000
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 (FY20–21, $55k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 73% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%INDO JAX SURF CHARITIES: $25k → 12%INDO JAX SURF CHARITIES INC: $15k → 12%MONUMENT CRISIS CENTER: $15k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

MT
MN
IL
NY
OR
CA
CO
AZ
NM
NC
DC
TX
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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$14M · 20 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +25% since the first grant, against -17% for those funded once.

20 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
21

Total granted

$14M
$773k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+25%
-17%

Still filing today

95%
76%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $320k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentArts & CultureFood & NutritionEducationHealthScience & TechOther
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

  • EARTHJUSTICE
    5× · 2020–2024 · $4.2M · revenue +16%
  • WE
    WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER
    5× · 2020–2024 · $2.5M · revenue +48%
  • AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $1.7M · revenue +27%

Funded once

  • Civic Nationgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $250k · revenue +34%
  • RN
    ROADTRIP NATION LTD
    one grant, 2017 · $150k · revenue +39%
  • TP
    The Peoples Choice for President Institute
    one grant, 2021 · $150k · revenue -60% · 58% of their budget
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 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
2
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
3
California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance

California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.

Environment
4
Pew Research Center

Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan "fact tank" that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping America and the world. Pew Research Center generates a foundation of facts that enriches the public dialogue and…

Social Science
5
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
6
The Trust for Public Land

The trust for public land creates parks and protects land for people, ensuring healthy, livable communities for generations to come. in the past year, we helped communities to plan for parks and conservation, fund parks and conservation,…

Environment
7
Wildlife Conservation Network Inc

Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.

Animals
8
Sustainable Conservation

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…

Environment
9
American Civil Liberties Union Fund of the District of Columbia

Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.

—
10
World Resources Institute

Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…

International
11
United Food Bank

United Food Bank unites communities to alleviate hunger.

Food & Nutrition
12
Pro Publica Inc

Pro publica is an independent, non-profit, pulitzer prize-winning newsroom that produces investigative journalism in the public interest. our work focuses exclusively on truly important stories. [see continuation on schedule o] we produce…

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Inc; the most unlike its peers is Indo Jax Surf Charities 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

43 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. 43 of the 48 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
41/43
Grantees still filing
25/43
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EARTHJUSTICE: $4,200,000 · EnvironmentEARTHJUSTICEENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP: $900,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP+4 more: $340,000 · Environment+4 moreWESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER: $2,500,000 · OtherWESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CE…ROADTRIP NATION LTD: $150,000 · OtherCivic Nation: $250,000 · OtherCivic NationTHE 19TH NEWS: $200,000 · OtherWestern Resource Advocates: $170,000 · Other+23 more: $547,804 · Other+23 moreCENTER FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST: $1,500,000 · Food & NutritionCENTER FOR SCIENCE…FOOD & WATER WATCH: $500,000 · Food & NutritionFOOD & WATER WATCHFeeding America: $225,000 · Food & NutritionFeeding AmericaST MARY'S FOOD BANK ALLIANCE: $117,500 · Food & NutritionFoodbank of Santa Barbara County Inc: $110,000 · Food & Nutrition+1 more: $55,000 · Food & NutritionAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $1,700,000 · Civil RightsAMERICAN CIVI…The Peoples Choice for President Institute: $150,000 · Civil RightsThe Peoples C…MULTIDISCIPLINARY ASSOCIATION FOR PSYCHEDELIC STUDIES INC: $550,000 · HealthMAYO CLINIC: $100,000 · Health+1 more: $10,000 · HealthINSTITUTE OF NOETIC SCIENCES: $465,000 · Science & TechCenter for Humane Technology: $100,000 · Science & TechNATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION: $450,000 · Recreation & Sports
Environment$5,440,000Other$3,817,804Food & Nutrition$2,507,500Civil Rights$1,850,000Health$660,000Science & Tech$565,000Recreation & Sports$450,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $4,200,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetWESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER: $2,500,000 over 5y, 14% of budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $1,700,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetCENTER FOR SCIENCE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST: $1,500,000 over 5y, 2.1% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL WORKING GROUP: $900,000 over 3y, 2.2% of budgetMULTIDISCIPLINARY ASSOCIATION FOR PSYCHEDELIC STUDIES INC: $550,000 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetFOOD & WATER WATCH: $500,000 over 5y, 1.0% of budgetINSTITUTE OF NOETIC SCIENCES: $465,000 over 5y, 3.6% of budgetNATIONAL FOREST FOUNDATION: $450,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetCivic Nation: $250,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetFeeding America: $225,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE 19TH NEWS: $200,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetWestern Resource Advocates: $170,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetROADTRIP NATION LTD: $150,000 over 1y, 3.6% of budgetThe Peoples Choice for President Institute: $150,000 over 1y, 58% of budgetST MARY'S FOOD BANK ALLIANCE: $117,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetLOS PADRES FORESTWATCH INC: $115,000 over 2y, 6.3% of budgetFoodbank of Santa Barbara County Inc: $110,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetCenter for Humane Technology: $100,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetMAYO CLINIC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGAVIOTA COAST CONSERVANCY: $100,000 over 4y, 8.1% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJohn Muir Land Trust prev Muir Heritage Land Trust: $95,000 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetFOOD BANK OF CONTRA COSTA AND SOLANO: $55,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetARIZONA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetIndo Jax Surf Charities Inc: $40,000 over 2y, 22% of budgetSUSTAINABLE LAFAYETTE: $30,000 over 3y, 34% of budgetThe Park Theater Trust: $25,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetAMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWEST VALLEY ARTS COUNCIL: $20,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetTHE NEWS LITERACY PROJECT INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMONUMENT CRISIS CENTER: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe Markup News Inc: $12,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSUPPORT 4 RECOVERY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetAUBIN PICTURES INC: $8,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBROOKLYN PUBLIC LIBRARY: $7,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGrandPaws Pantry: $5,000 over 1y, 7.6% of budgetPW LITCHFIELD HERITAGE CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetGLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTRANSITION HOUSE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCOUNCIL ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWIKIMEDIA FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 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.

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 New York Communit…The Ford FoundationMarin Community Found…Susan Crown Exchange …Silicon Valley Commun…Tides FoundationNew Venture FundThe Chicago Community…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Vanguard Charitable E…
The New York Community TrustNY18.4× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The New York Community Trust · The Ford Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Susan Crown Exchange Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · The Chicago Community Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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 John Sperling Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from John Sperling Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    14report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 John Sperling Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to John Sperling 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 48 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 John Sperling’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