Skip to content

· Private foundation

Karol Uryga-Nawarowski Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$53k
Granted FY2024still arriving
17
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$15k
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 2024.

Human Services$118kHousing & Shelter$116kArts & Culture$27kInternational$21kReligion$16kFood & Nutrition$12kCommunity Improvement$12kHealth$12kOther$0
02FY2024 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k15 grants · $27k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $27k
$1,500
Median grant
6
States reached
$1.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Polish American Association$15,000
Anawim Women's Shelter$11,500
Razom$4,500
Bay Area Rescue Mission$2,700
Shepard's Gate$2,500
SF Chronicle Season of Sharing Fund$2,500
Polish Pastoral Mission$2,400
Tongue River Emergency Shelter$2,000
George Mark Children's House$1,500
Samaritan's Pantry$1,500
Building Futures$1,500
JP II Polish American Cultural Cent$1,500
Harbor House Ministries$1,000
Tongue River Emergency Shelter$1,000
Raphael House$1,000
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 (FY17–24, $82k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Raphael House: $2k → 10%Raphael House: $2k → 10%Raphael House: $1k → 10%Raphael House: $1k → 10%Raphael House: $1k → 10%Raphael House: $1k → 10%Raphael House: $1k → 10%Polish American Association: $26k → 14%Polish American Association: $15k → 14%Polish American Association: $15k → 14%Polish American Association: $10k → 14%Polish American Association: $7k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

MT
IL
NY
OH
PA
CT
CA
VA
MD
DC
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.

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$324k · 22 repeat orgs$19k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +50% since the first grant, against +35% for those funded once.

22 repeat relationships: 14 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

22
10

Total granted

$324k
$18k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+35%

Still filing today

45%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
InternationalHuman ServicesHealthPublic Safety & DisasterHousing & ShelterCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • PA
    POLISH AMERICAN ASSOCIATION
    4× · 2018–2024 · $73k · revenue +51%
  • SM
    ST MARY'S CENTER
    4× · 2017–2023 · $33k · revenue +49%
  • BA
    BAY AREA RESCUE MISSION
    8× · 2017–2024 · $24k · revenue +32%

Funded once

  • PO
    PATHFINDERS OF SAN DIEGOgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $4k · revenue +63%
  • AMERICARES FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue +35%
  • COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC
    one grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue -6%
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 San Francisco Particular Council of the Society of St Vincent De Paul

The mission of the st. vincent de paul society of san francisco (svdp-sf) is to offer hope and service on a direct person-to-person basis, working to break the cycles of homelessness and domestic violence.

Human Services
2
San Francisco Family Foundation
—
3
Hamilton Families

Hamilton families' mission is to end family homelessness in the san francisco bay area.

Housing & Shelter
4
Mission Hospice & Home Care Inc

Delivering compassionate support and exceptional care in the home for individuals and communities, guiding them with choice and dignity to navigate significant care decisions.

Human Services
5
San Francisco Network Ministries Housing Corporation

San Francisco Network Ministries Housing Corporation works to empower and support women who are experiencing housing instability and sexual exploitation or trafficking, by creating survivor-centered spaces, services advocacy and community…

Unclassified
6
Compass Family Services

Compass family services helps homeless families and those at imminent risk to achieve housing stability, economic self-sufficiency, and well-being.

Human Services
7
Dish Sf

The Organization was formed to assume operation of the activities undertaken by the Tides Center ("Tides"), a California nonprofit corporation and Section 501(c)(3) publicly supported public charity. The effective date of this transition…

Housing & Shelter
8
Rescue Mission Alliance

The rescue mission alliance's primary purpose is to establish and operate rescue missions to reach the less fortunate with the gospel of jesus christ and to assist in the feeding, clothing, and lodging of those who are destitute or…

Human Services
9
Community Forward Sf Inc

Community Forward SF's support services create pathways from crisis to long-term stability through our Women's Wellness Pathway, a proven continuum linking a 24/7 drop-in center, shelter, transitional housing, behavioral health care, and…

Health
10
Shelter Inc

The mission of shelter, inc. is to prevent and end homelessness for low-income, homeless, and disadvantaged families and individuals by providing housing, services, support, and resources that lead to self-sufficiency.

Housing & Shelter
11
Urban Angels Sf

Urban Angels SF (Urban Angels) is a not-for-profit organization with the mission to sustain the homeless of San Francisco while they are in transition from living on the streets to safe permanent housing. Our volunteers provide sustenance…

Human Services
12
Abode Services

Abode services offers housing programs linked to supportive services for homeless families, single adults and youth. housing options include permanent supportive housing rental subsidy assistance, rapid rehousing and emergency shelter.…

Housing & Shelter
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bay Area Rescue Mission; the most unlike its peers is Garfield County Fire Foundation. 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

17 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. 17 of the 34 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)
16/17
Grantees still filing
13/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Anawim Women's Shelter: $60,300 · OtherAnawim Women's ShelterST MARY'S CENTER: $33,200 · OtherST MARY'S CENTERSF Chronicle Season of Sharing Fund: $20,000 · OtherSF Chronicle Season of Sharing FundSAMARITANS PANTRY: $9,250 · OtherPolish Pastoral Center: $7,150 · OtherPolish Pastoral Mission: $6,900 · OtherFreedom Ranch: $6,100 · Other+14 more: $31,899 · Other+14 morePOLISH AMERICAN ASSOCIATION: $73,000 · Human ServicesPOLISH AMERICAN ASSOCIATIONBAY AREA RESCUE MISSION: $23,700 · Human ServicesBAY AREA RESCUE MISSIONRAPHAEL HOUSE OF SAN FRANCISCO INC: $8,700 · Human ServicesRAPHAEL HOUSE OF SAN FRANCISCO INCRAZOM INC: $11,500 · InternationalAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $3,400 · InternationalCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $3,200 · InternationalGLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC: $3,200 · InternationalShepherds Gate: $17,500 · Housing & ShelterGeorge Mark Childrens Fund: $6,500 · HealthPATHFINDERS OF SAN DIEGO: $4,000 · HealthOperation Snowball Inc: $500 · HealthHarbor House Ministries Inc: $9,200 · Community ImprovementBUILDING FUTURES INC: $4,000 · Youth Development
Other$174,799Human Services$105,400International$21,300Housing & Shelter$17,500Health$11,000Community Improvement$9,200Youth Development$4,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPOLISH AMERICAN ASSOCIATION: $73,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetST MARY'S CENTER: $33,200 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetBAY AREA RESCUE MISSION: $23,700 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetShepherds Gate: $17,500 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetRAZOM INC: $11,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetHarbor House Ministries Inc: $9,200 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetRAPHAEL HOUSE OF SAN FRANCISCO INC: $8,700 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetGeorge Mark Childrens Fund: $6,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetPATHFINDERS OF SAN DIEGO: $4,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBUILDING FUTURES INC: $4,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetAMERICARES FOUNDATION INC: $3,400 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC: $3,200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC: $3,200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCHRONICLE SEASON OF SHARING FUND: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOperation Snowball Inc: $500 over 1y, 0.2% 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 POLISH AMERICAN ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds ST MARY'S CENTER ↗
  • Who funds BAY AREA RESCUE MISSION ↗
  • Who funds Shepherds Gate ↗
  • Who funds RAZOM INC ↗
  • Who funds Harbor House Ministries Inc ↗
  • Who funds RAPHAEL HOUSE OF SAN FRANCISCO INC ↗
  • Who funds George Mark Childrens Fund ↗
  • Who funds PATHFINDERS OF SAN DIEGO ↗
  • Who funds BUILDING FUTURES INC ↗
  • Who funds AMERICARES FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC ↗
  • Who funds GLOBALGIVING FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CHRONICLE SEASON OF SHARING FUND ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS & FAMILY ↗
  • Who funds Operation Snowball Inc ↗
  • Who funds GARFIELD COUNTY FIRE FOUNDATION ↗

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.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO3.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Karol Uryga-Nawarowski Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Karol Uryga-Nawarowski 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%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Americares Foundation Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
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 34 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 Karol Uryga-Nawarowski’s filings →

More from the funding graph