Skip to content
Kirkpatrick Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Kirkpatrick Family 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.

$43k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$22k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Environment$132kEducation$126kArts & Culture$66kPhilanthropy$20kHealth$8kPublic Safety & Disaster$2kHuman Services$1kInternational$703Other$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $6k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $36k
$250
Median grant
5
States reached
$1k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GRADES OF GREEN$22,280
ARTWORX LA$13,950
SJHC FOUNDATION$4,225
Individual grant recipient$1,451
MSK CANCER CENTER-CYCLE FOR SURVIVAL$250
CALIFORNIA FIRE FOUNDATION$250
Individual grant recipient$115
DAVIS PHINNEY FOUNDATION$100
LA STRONG FOUNDATION$23
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 (FY17–22, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%FARMLINK PROJECT: $100 → 17%CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE: $350 → 14%CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE: $190 → 14%LOS ANGELES ORPHANAGE GUILD: $200 → 14%LOS ANGELES ORPHANAGE GUILD: $195 → 14%LOS ANGELES ORPHANAGE GUILD: $150 → 14%LOS ANGELES ORPHANAGE GUILD: $100 → 14%LOS ANGELES ORPHANAGE GUILD: $100 → 14%SKECHERS FOUNDATION: $250 → 14%SKECHERS FOUNDATION: $100 → 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

IL
NY
IN
PA
NJ
CA
CO
MD
AZ
DC
GA
TX
FL
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.
$210k · 15 repeat orgs$17k to everyone else

15 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
48

Total granted

$210k
$13k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
+47%

Still filing today

60%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesEnvironmentEducationPhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • GO
    GRADES OF GREEN INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $130k · revenue +50%
  • TH
    THE H E ART PROJECT dba ARTWORXLA
    8× · 2017–2025 · $65k · revenue +15%
  • CC
    CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $540 · revenue +76%

Funded once

  • RF
    ROESSLER-CHADWICK FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $3k · revenue +47%
  • TE
    THE ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA ASSOCIATIONINC
    one grant, 2022 · $2k · revenue +5%
  • HF
    HG FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $500 · revenue ×16
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 Jonsson Cancer Center Foundation

The jonsson cancer center foundation is the single most important vehicle for raising private funds for cancer research at ucla and plays a key role in advancing cancer treatments and care. please see schedule o for additional information.

—
2
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
3
The Uc Davis Foundation

The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.

Education
4
California Dental Association Foundation

The foundation's mission is to improve the oral health of all californians by supporting the dental profession and its efforts to meet community needs.

Science & Tech
5
City of Hope

City of Hope's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION

Health
6
California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy

To harness the power of the human immune system and advanced computing technologies to create and translate scientific discoveries into next generation vaccines and therapies for prevention, control and cure of chronic diseases, enabling…

Health
7
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
8
Asco Association

Asco association promotes the common business interests of its members by: (1) advocating for policies that improve the quality of cancer care; (2) maintaining the highest standards of oncology medical care through programs supporting…

Community Improvement
9
The Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Fdn Group

Susan g. komen 's mission is to save lives by meeting the most critical needs in our communities & investing in breakthrough research to prevent & cure breast cancer.

—
10
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
11
International Food Information Council

To effectively communicate science based information on food safety, nutrition, and health for the public good.

Arts & Culture
12
Samuel Waxman Cancer Research Foundation

The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is California Community Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Hg 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

33 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 33 of the 71 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
33/33
Grantees still filing
21/33
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GRADES OF GREEN INC: $129,510 · EnvironmentGRADES OF GREEN INC+1 more: $2,000 · EnvironmentUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $110,100 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAUCLA FOUNDATION: $9,050 · EducationUCLA FOUNDATION+2 more: $2,850 · EducationTHE H E ART PROJECT dba ARTWORXLA: $65,254 · Arts & CultureTHE H E ART PROJECT …SJHC FOUNDATION: $4,225 · OtherSAINT SEBASTIAN SCHOOL: $3,600 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $2,451 · OtherHIRSHBERG FOUNDATION: $2,000 · OtherCALIFORNIA FIRE FOUNDATION: $1,750 · OtherLYNNE COHEN FOUNDATION: $1,716 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $865 · Other+49 more: $8,486 · OtherCALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $10,000 · PhilanthropyHG FOUNDATION: $500 · Philanthropy+1 more: $120 · PhilanthropyNETWORK FOR GOOD: $5,691 · Public Safety & DisasterLOS ANGELES MARYVALE GUILD: $745 · Human ServicesCANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC: $540 · Human ServicesSKECHERS FOUNDATION: $350 · Human ServicesFARMLINK PROJECT: $100 · Human Services
Environment$131,510Education$122,000Arts & Culture$65,254Other$25,093Philanthropy$10,620Public Safety & Disaster$5,691Human Services$1,735

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 budgetGRADES OF GREEN INC: $129,510 over 9y, 4.2% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $110,100 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE H E ART PROJECT dba ARTWORXLA: $65,254 over 8y, 0.8% of budgetCALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUCLA FOUNDATION: $9,050 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNETWORK FOR GOOD: $5,691 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetROESSLER-CHADWICK FOUNDATION: $2,650 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ENVIRONMENTAL MEDIA ASSOCIATIONINC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCALIFORNIA FIRE FOUNDATION: $1,750 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLOS ANGELES MARYVALE GUILD: $745 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC: $540 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHG FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL BLEEDING DISORDERS FOUNDATION: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSKECHERS FOUNDATION: $350 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $300 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS: $300 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEPILEPSY FOUNDATION OF AMERICA: $262 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE CATHOLIC COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetLAS FLORISTAS INC: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetGLOBAL TRAINING NETWORK INC: $200 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFIRST TECH FUND INC: $103 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBest Buddies International Inc: $103 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Susan G Komen Breast Cancer Foundation Inc: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBENEVOLENT HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFARMLINK PROJECT: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUSA WATER POLO INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Houston Food Bank: $50 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTransgender Law Center: $50 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.

National Philanthropi…Morgan Stanley Global…American Endowment Fo…American Online Givin…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…The Bank of America C…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA8.5× affinity7 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Endowment Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation 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 Kirkpatrick Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Kirkpatrick Family 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%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 22%
  • Epilepsy Foundation of America: 22% of income from government
  • Best Buddies International Inc: 4% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
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 71 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 Kirkpatrick Family’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