Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

Kieve Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$488k
Granted FY2025still arriving
46
Grants FY2025still arriving
7
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.

Animals$1.3MArts & Culture$473kHealth$228kFood & Nutrition$126kEducation$124kCommunity Improvement$98kHuman Services$94kInternational$82kOther$0
02FY2025 · 46 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k28 grants · $78k
  • $10k–50k16 grants · $260k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $150k
$5,000
Median grant
7
States reached
$6.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DREAM FETCHERS$100,000
Individual grant recipient$50,000
SOI DOG FOUNDATION USA$25,000
SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK OF SILICON VALLEY$25,000
CENTER FOR ANIMAL PROTECTION$25,000
SCRITCH KITTENS$25,000
EVERY PET'S DREAM$25,000
PHYSICIANS COMMITTEE FOR RESPONSIBLE MEDICINE$20,000
Individual grant recipient$20,000
ANIMAL PLACE$15,000
SECOND CHANCE RESCUE NYC$10,000
ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND$10,000
QUEST VALLEY CHARITIES$10,000
LOVE LEO RESCUE$10,000
AT-CHOO FOUNDATION$10,000
02The need
03

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $100k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YMCA OF SILICON VALLEY: $500 → 8%YMCA OF SILICON VALLEY: $500 → 8%YMCA OF SILICON VALLEY: $500 → 8%YMCA OF SILICON VALLEY: $500 → 8%YMCA OF SILICON VALLEY: $500 → 8%YMCA OF SILICON VALLEY: $500 → 8%YMCA OF SILICON VALLEY: $500 → 8%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $500 → 8%AMERICAN RED CROSS: $500 → 8%NEXT DOOR SOLUTIONS: $20k → 8%NEXT DOOR SOLUTIONS: $15k → 8%NEXT DOOR SOLUTIONS: $15k → 8%NEXT DOOR SOLUTIONS: $15k → 8%NEXT DOOR SOLUTIONS: $10k → 8%HUNGER AT HOME: $3k → 8%HUNGER AT HOME: $3k → 8%HUNGER AT HOME: $3k → 8%HUNGER AT HOME: $3k → 8%HUNGER AT HOME: $3k → 8%NEXT DOOR SOLUTIONS: $2k → 8%HUNGER AT HOME: $2k → 8%NEXT DOOR SOLUTIONS: $2k → 8%HUNGER AT HOME: $1k → 8%HUNGER AT HOME: $500 → 8%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

Which US states your grants reach

NY
MA
NJ
CA
VA
MD
AZ
KS
DC
TX
FL

US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

04

Where the work is directed

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

About 6% of Kieve Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 91% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 89% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

Kieve Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge
repeat funding

Who you back again

Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$2.5M · 74 repeat orgs$125k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +24% since the first grant, against -6% for the ones you funded once.

74 repeat relationships — 43 still active in FY2025, 31 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

74
27

Total granted

$2.5M
$107k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
-6%

Still filing today

58%
30%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $18k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsArts & CultureHealthHuman ServicesPhilanthropyInternationalOther

First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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

  • BF
    Balooja's Foundation Inc
    5× · 2020–2024 · $210k · revenue +26% · 29% of their budget
  • SS
    SYMPHONY SAN JOSE
    7× · 2017–2025 · $165k · revenue +19%
  • AP
    Animal Place
    6× · 2020–2025 · $85k · revenue +9%

Funded once

  • AV
    ALMADEN VALLEY WOMANS CLUB
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue -94%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $10k
  • QV
    QUEST VALLEY CHARITIES QVC
    one grant, 2022 · $10k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
The San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

To ensure every companion animal has access to quality medical care, compassionate shelter, and a loving home.

Animals
2
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County

The SPCA Monterey County's Mission is assuring compassionate treatment of all animals through rescue, rehabilitation, protection and education. The SPCA shelters homeless, neglected, and abused pets, including dogs, cats, horses, exotic…

Animals
3
Spark Rescue Santa Barbara

It is Spark Rescue's mission to rescue, rehabilitate, medically treat, spay and neuter unwanted dogs and cats and place them into permanent homes. To prevent future un wanted litters we spay the mother of the litter being surrendered. We…

Animals
4
Silicon Valley Pet Project

Silicon valley pet project (svpp) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization committed to saving local at-risk shelter pets through rescue, community involvement and education.

Animals
5
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

The aspca's mission, as stated by founder henry bergh in 1866, is "to provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the united states." the aspca was founded on the belief that animals are entitled to kind and…

Animals
6
California Animal Rescue and Education Sanctuary Inc

C.A.R.E.S.MISSION STATEMENT*Rescue, foster and find good homes for abandoned and homeless domestic and farm animals.*Spay/neuter abandoned and homeless cats and dogs, as well as help low income families with same.*Conduct TNR+ programs to…

—
7
Santa Barbara Humane Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Santa barbara humane operates two campuses located in santa barbara and santa maria providing care for community-owned and homeless animals. both campuses offer affordable high quality veterinary care, compassionate behavior training…

Animals
8
Amazing Dogs

Our mission is to save dogs in distressing conditions on both sides of the California/Mexican border. We provide them with essential medical treatment and care to help them regain their health, and ultimately match them with loving homes…

Animals
9
Santa Cruz Spca and Humane Society

The Santa Cruz SPCA provides safe harbor for animals in need and promotes an active humane community through adoption, advocacy, and education.

Animals
10
Coppers Dream Rescue

To end the euthanasia of adoptable dogs in the united states through increasing public awareness, taking legal action that will benefit shelter animals, prompting low cost spay/neuter programs and by rescuing dogs scheduled for euthenasia…

Human Services
11
Pets in Need

The mission of pets in need is to provide animals with loving care and lasting homes, to partner with communities striving to do the same, and to advance our no-kill legacy.

Animals
12
A Purposeful Rescue Inc

A purposeful rescue is a 501c3 non-profit that saves dogs from high-kill los angeles area shelters.

Animals

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rotary Club of San Jose Foundation and the most unlike its peers is California Trolley & Railroad Corporation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyAnimal Rescue and ShelterFood Banks and PantriesHealth Access Advocacy and …Independent K-12 SchoolsEnvironmental Conservation …Community FoundationsYouth Development CentersPolicy Research and AdvocacyCancer Support ServicesOrchestra and Ensemble Perf…
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 38 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number24%6%<5yr15%9%5–10yr20%19%10–20yr17%13%20–35yr11%26%35–55yr13%26%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value24%4%<5yr15%31%5–10yr20%17%10–20yr17%19%20–35yr11%19%35–55yr13%11%55yr+

The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/60
the rest of the field
14%
26,003/186,918

Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.

05the grantee network

53 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 53 of the 104 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
14
Early backer (in before they grew)
53/53
Grantees still filing
33/53
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Balooja's Foundation Inc — $210,000 · AnimalsBalooja's Foundation IncEVERY PETS DREAM — $170,000 · AnimalsEVERY PETS DREAMDREAM FETCHERS — $150,000 · AnimalsDREAM FETCHERSAnimal Place — $85,000 · AnimalsAnimal PlaceANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC — $60,000 · AnimalsANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INCMUTTVILLE — $55,000 · AnimalsMUTTVILLELOVELEO RESCUE — $33,000 · Animals+7 more — $79,000 · Animals+7 moreCENTER FOR ANIMAL PROTECTION — $108,000 · OtherCENTER FOR ANIMAL PROTECTIONIndividual grant recipient — $85,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientRotary Club of San Jose Inc — $73,500 · OtherRotary Club of San Jose IncSCRITCH KITTENS — $55,000 · OtherSCRITCH KITTENSLINCOLN LAW SCHOOL — $35,000 · OtherSECOND CHANCE RESCUE NYC — $33,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient — $30,000 · Other+58 more — $473,200 · Other+58 moreSYMPHONY SAN JOSE — $165,000 · Arts & CultureSYMPHONY SAN JOSESAN JOSE LIGHT TOWER CORPORATION — $165,000 · Arts & CultureSAN JOSE LIGHT TOW…OPERA SAN JOSE INCORPORATED — $35,000 · Arts & CultureOPERA SAN JOSE INC…HISTORY SAN JOSE — $26,500 · Arts & CultureHISTORY SAN JOSE+6 more — $40,000 · Arts & Culture+6 moreSoi Dog Foundation USA — $125,000 · PhilanthropyAT-CHOO FOUNDATION — $23,000 · PhilanthropyQUEST VALLEY CHARITIES INC — $10,000 · Philanthropy+1 more — $1,000 · PhilanthropyStroke Awareness Foundation — $52,000 · HealthPhysicians Committee for Responsible Med — $49,000 · HealthCANCER CAREPOINT INC — $10,000 · HealthVIA REHABILITATION SERVICES INC — $8,500 · HealthTRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION — $7,000 · Health+1 more — $2,000 · HealthNEXT DOOR SOLUTIONS TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE — $79,000 · Human ServicesHUNGER AT HOME — $16,500 · Human ServicesYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SILICON VALLEY — $3,500 · Human Services+1 more — $1,000 · Human ServicesSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY — $90,000 · Food & Nutrition
Animals$842,000Other$892,700Arts & Culture$431,500Philanthropy$159,000Health$128,500Human Services$100,000Food & Nutrition$90,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetBalooja's Foundation Inc — $210,000 over 5y, 29% of budgetEVERY PETS DREAM — $170,000 over 6y, 70% of budgetSYMPHONY SAN JOSE — $165,000 over 7y, 2.6% of budgetSAN JOSE LIGHT TOWER CORPORATION — $165,000 over 3y, 19% of budgetDREAM FETCHERS — $150,000 over 2y, 40% of budgetSoi Dog Foundation USA — $125,000 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY — $90,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAnimal Place — $85,000 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetNEXT DOOR SOLUTIONS TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE — $79,000 over 7y, 0.4% of budgetRotary Club of San Jose Inc — $73,500 over 4y, 4.5% of budgetANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC — $60,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetMUTTVILLE — $55,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetStroke Awareness Foundation — $52,000 over 7y, 0.6% of budgetPhysicians Committee for Responsible Med — $49,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetOPERA SAN JOSE INCORPORATED — $35,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetLOVELEO RESCUE — $33,000 over 5y, 1.4% of budgetHISTORY SAN JOSE — $26,500 over 8y, 0.4% of budgetALMADEN VALLEY WOMANS CLUB — $25,000 over 1y, 9.8% of budgetAnimal Pad — $23,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetAT-CHOO FOUNDATION — $23,000 over 3y, 3.7% of budgetOPERATION SMILE INC — $22,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEY — $20,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetHUNGER AT HOME — $16,500 over 8y, 1.4% of budgetTHE BERKSHIRE SCHOOL INC — $16,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetPIVOTAL CONNECTIONS — $15,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetROTARY CLUB OF SAN JOSE FOUNDATION — $13,800 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF SILICON VALLEY — $10,500 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetCANCER CAREPOINT INC — $10,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetRancho Roben Rescues Inc — $10,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetNATIVE ANIMAL RESCUE — $10,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetQUEST VALLEY CHARITIES INC — $10,000 over 1y, 25% of budgetSAN JOSE MUSEUM OF ART ASSOCIATION — $9,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetVIA REHABILITATION SERVICES INC — $8,500 over 7y, 0.7% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC — $8,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetSAN JOSE YOUTH SYMPHONY — $8,000 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetTHE TECH INTERACTIVE — $8,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetSAN JOSE CHILDREN'S DISCOVERY MUSEUM — $7,500 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetPENINSULA OPEN SPACE TRUST — $7,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetTRIPLE NEGATIVE BREAST CANCER FOUNDATION — $7,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetHappy Hollow Foundation — $6,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetCHRISTMAS IN THE PARK — $6,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKIM'S NURTURING NEST ANIMAL SANCTUARY — $5,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetNetwork for Animals USA Inc — $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe Eisenhower Foundation — $4,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SILICON VALLEY — $3,500 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetKQED INC — $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc — $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budget
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them

A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds Balooja's Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds EVERY PETS DREAM ↗
  • Who funds SYMPHONY SAN JOSE ↗
  • Who funds SAN JOSE LIGHT TOWER CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds DREAM FETCHERS ↗
  • Who funds Soi Dog Foundation USA ↗
  • Who funds SECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds Animal Place ↗
  • Who funds NEXT DOOR SOLUTIONS TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ↗
  • Who funds Rotary Club of San Jose Inc ↗
  • Who funds ANIMAL LEGAL DEFENSE FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds MUTTVILLE ↗
  • Who funds Stroke Awareness Foundation ↗
  • Who funds Physicians Committee for Responsible Med ↗
  • Who funds OPERA SAN JOSE INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds LOVELEO RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds HISTORY SAN JOSE ↗
  • Who funds ALMADEN VALLEY WOMANS CLUB ↗
  • Who funds Animal Pad ↗
  • Who funds AT-CHOO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds OPERATION SMILE INC ↗
  • Who funds HUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds HUNGER AT HOME ↗
  • Who funds THE BERKSHIRE SCHOOL INC ↗

The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Rotary Club of San Jo…The Brandenburg Famil…The Applied Materials…Los Altos Mountain Vi…Farrington Historical…Silicon Valley Commun…The David and Lucile …Bright Funds Foundati…Leo M Shortino Family…The Sobrato Family Fo…San Jose Mercury News…Agilent Technologies …
Rotary Club of San Jose FoundationCA28.3× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Rotary Club of San Jose Foundation · The Brandenburg Family Foundation · The Applied Materials Foundation · Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation · Farrington Historical Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Bright Funds Foundation · Leo M Shortino Family Foundation · The Sobrato Family Foundation · San Jose Mercury News Wish Book Fund Inc · Agilent Technologies Foundation

Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

Government reliance of your grantees

Every dot is one organization Kieve Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%5%19%42%75%your share of their income ↑0%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    18report 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

    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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 104 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines