Skip to content
Kazanjian Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Private foundation

Kazanjian Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$3k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Health$31kEducation$16kCrime & Legal$6kPublic Safety & Disaster$6kReligion$4kArts & Culture$4kScience & Tech$3kEnvironment$3kOther$0
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$3,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$249k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FRIENDS OF ROBINSON GARDEN$3,000
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 (FY18–19, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%AbilityFirst: $1k → 14%Beverly Hills Women's Club: $500 → 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.
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 13% of Kazanjian Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 51% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 31%.

Kazanjian Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 27% directed abroad (not shown)
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.

14%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$11k · 3 repeat orgs$65k to everyone else

3 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
14

Total granted

$11k
$62k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+16%
+29%

Still filing today

33%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
HealthHuman ServicesEnvironmentOther
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

  • TL
    The League of Children - Childrens
    2× · 2019–2020 · $6k
  • CD
    CASA DE AMMA
    3× · 2018–2022 · $3k · revenue +16%
  • LR
    LYON RANCH THERAPY ANIMALS
    2× · 2018–2019 · $2k

Funded once

  • DA
    Dana's Angels Research Trustgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $23k · revenue +30%
  • UI
    USC Institute of Armenian Studies
    one grant, 2019 · $15k
  • CA
    CRESCENT ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2020 · $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
Pasadena Hospital Association Ltd

Huntington Health stands for community. We stand for compassion. But more than anything, Huntington stands for health. Providing world-class health care is our specialty, and it's what we've been doing for the San Gabriel Valley since…

Health
2
Usc Arcadia Hospital Foundation

Mission statement the mission of usc arcadia hospital foundation educates and inspires the community to generously support quality medical care at usc arcadia hospital.

Health
3
Children's Hospital Los Angeles Medical Group

To be the preeminent pediatric, multispecialty medical group in the nation, dedicated to providing the highest quality medical care to infants, children and adolescents; and supporting the finest teaching and research endeavors of our…

—
4
Doheny Eye Institute

To further the conservation, improvement and restoration of human eyesight" (mrs. doheny - 1947).

—
5
Barlow Respiratory Hospital

A not-for-profit, long-term acute care specialty healthcare organization is to improve the quality of life for patients with respiratory and other diseases that may require prolonged acute hospitalization of specialized treatment.

Health
6
Los Angeles Accessible Apartments C
—
7
Southern California University of Health Sciences

The mission of southern california university of health sciences (scu) is to educate students as competent, caring and successful practitioners of integrative healthcare. the university is committed to providing excellence in academics,…

Education
8
Glaucoma Institute of Beverly Hills Research Foundation Inc
Health
9
Arc Research Institute

Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress, understand the root causes of disease, and narrow the gap between discoveries and impact on patients.

Health
10
Children's Hospital Corporation

Provider of pediatric healthcare, education, research & community service

Health
11
Sutter Bay Hospitals

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
12
Usc Health System

The Corporation is a nonprofit public benefit corporation and is not organized for the private gain of any person. It is organized under the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation Law for public and charitable purposes. The Corporation is…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children's Hospital Los Angeles; the most unlike its peers is Beverly Hills Womens Club. 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

10 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. 10 of the 19 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

USC Institute of Armenian Studies: $15,000 · OtherUSC Institute of Armenian StudiesThe League of Children - Childrens: $6,000 · OtherThe League of Children - ChildrensCRESCENT ASSOCIATION: $5,000 · OtherCRESCENT ASSOCIATIONWesley United Methodist Church: $4,365 · OtherWesley United Methodist ChurchARCS: $3,000 · OtherARCSNational Association for Armenian Studies and Research Inc: $2,500 · OtherNational Association for Armenian Studies and Research IncLYON RANCH THERAPY ANIMALS: $2,000 · Other+3 more: $2,000 · OtherDana's Angels Research Trust: $23,100 · HealthDana's Angels Research TrustChildren's Hospital Los Angeles: $2,500 · HealthChildren's Hospital Los AngelesCASA DE AMMA: $2,500 · HealthCASA DE AMMAST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $2,000 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC+1 more: $1,000 · HealthFRIENDS OF ROBINSON GARDENS INC: $3,000 · EnvironmentABILITYFIRST: $1,000 · Human ServicesBeverly Hills Womens Club: $500 · Human ServicesUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $500 · Education
Other$39,865Health$31,100Environment$3,000Human Services$1,500Education$500

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 budgetDana's Angels Research Trust: $23,100 over 1y, 12% of budgetFRIENDS OF ROBINSON GARDENS INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetChildren's Hospital Los Angeles: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCASA DE AMMA: $2,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNational Association for Armenian Studies and Research Inc: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetABILITYFIRST: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetARARAT HOME OF LOS ANGELES: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBeverly Hills Womens Club: $500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $500 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.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO6.2× affinity5 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 Kazanjian Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Kazanjian Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 19 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 Kazanjian’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