Skip to content
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

California · Public charity

Junior League of Sacramento

The Junior League of Sacramento, Inc. (JLS) is an organization of women committed to promoting voluntarism, developing the potential of women and improving communities through the effective action and leadership of trained volunteers. Its purpose is exclusively educational and charitable. The JLS welcomes all women who value our mission.

$32k
Granted FY2018
5
Grants FY2018
5
Organizations funded FY2018
Read the full brief
Median grant, FY2018
$5,000
Largest grant, FY2018
$10,000
States reached, FY2018
1
Total assets, FY2018
$1.1M

Top grantees

Largest recipients by total granted, FY2018 to FY2018, and the share of each one’s budget the grants supplied at peak.

GranteeTotal grantedYearsShare of their budget
Powerhouse Science Center$10,00010%
Sacramento City Unified School District$6,7001n/a
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Sacramento County$5,00011%
Associated Students University of California Davis Business Office$5,0001n/a
Girls on the Run of Greater Sacramento Inc$5,00014%

Compare Junior League of Sacramento with peer funders

About Junior League of Sacramento

How much does Junior League of Sacramento give?
Junior League of Sacramento reported 5 grants totaling $31,700 in its FY2018 IRS filing.
What does Junior League of Sacramento fund?
By grant dollars over FY2018 to FY2018, its largest causes are Science & Tech (32%), Education (21%), Health (16%).
Who are Junior League of Sacramento's largest grantees?
By total granted over FY2018 to FY2018: Powerhouse Science Center ($10k), Sacramento City Unified School District ($7k), Court Appointed Special Advocates of Sacramento County ($5k).
Where is Junior League of Sacramento based?
Junior League of Sacramento is based in CA.

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 5 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2018, released 2018. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports $5k of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2018, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Junior League of Sacramento’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