Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Kodimer-Lutz Foundation

Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$5k
Granted FY2019
10
Grants FY2019
4
States reached
$2k
Largest

Read this first · the figures below need context

100% of Kodimer-Lutz Foundation’s FY2020 grant dollars went to Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2020 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year Kodimer-Lutz Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 6 organizations, $5k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

4
18
6
19
0
20

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

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 FY20182020.

Philanthropy$108kHealth$3kFood & Nutrition$2kEducation$2kHuman Services$1kAnimals$600Recreation & Sports$600Youth Development$600
02FY2019 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$500
Median grant
4
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UC Berkeley$1,500
ALS Foundation$500
Alameda County Community Food Bank$500
Bananas$500
Hospice of Kona$500
JDRF$500
The Food Basket Inc$500
Girls Inc$300
Berkeley Crew$300
Berkeley Humane Society$300
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 (FY18–19, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Caring Choices: $500 → 15%Hospice of Kona: $500 → 15%Bananas: $500 → 10%Bananas: $500 → 10%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.

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.

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.

70%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$6k · 7 repeat orgs$3k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2019, 0 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call). Read against FY2019, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
3

Total granted

$6k
$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+118%
+157%

Still filing today

57%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19
Human ServicesFood & NutritionHealthOther

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

  • ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK
    2× · 2018–2019 · $1k · revenue +118%
  • BI
    BANANAS INCORPORATED
    2× · 2018–2019 · $1k · revenue +220%
  • BT
    BREAKTHROUGH T1D
    2× · 2018–2019 · $1k · revenue +31%

Funded once

  • UB
    UC Berkeley
    one grant, 2019 · $2k
  • TF
    THE FOOD BASKET INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $500 · revenue +157%
  • HO
    HOSPICE OF KONA INC
    one grant, 2019 · $500 · revenue +15%

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
San Francisco Food Bank

To end hunger in san francisco and marin counties by soliciting food donations nationally, distributing this food to qualifying public service agencies and neighborhood pantries, advocating for improved government food programs, and…

2
Berkeley Food Network

The berkeley food network (bfn) works to expand food assistance services to food-insecure berkeley residents. bfn was founded in 2016 to help establish a foundation of good health from which all berkeley residents can pursue opportunity by…

Food & Nutrition
3
Feeding Hawaii Together

To combat hunger on o'ahu by ensuring reliable access to nutritious, culturally appropriate food for all.

Human Services
4
Foodbank of Santa Barbara County Inc

To end hunger and transform the health of our community by providing nourishment to those in need by acquiring and distributing safe nutritious food via local agencies and by providing education to solve hunger and nutritional problems in…

Food & Nutrition
5
Idaho Foodbank Warehouse

To help feed, educate and advocate for Idaho's hungry through collaborative partnerships to develop efficient solutions that strengthen individuals, families, and communities.

Food & Nutrition
6
Extrafood

Food Rescue - The Organization rescues excess fresh food from Bay Area businesses, schools and non-profits and immediately delivers the food to safety net partners - such as senior housing centers, after-school programs, and homeless…

Food & Nutrition
7
Maui Food Bank Inc

The mission of the maui food bank is to help the hungry in maui county by collecting and distributing food through community partnerships.

Food & Nutrition
8
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
9
Hawaii Foodbank Inc

Hawaii foodbank, inc. is a nonprofit organization established to collect, warehouse and distribute salvageable food to social agencies that feed the needy of hawaii. the company is a certified member of feeding america, a nonprofit…

Food & Nutrition
10
The Global FoodBanking Network

To nourish the world's hungry through uniting and advancing food banks.

International
11
Berkeley Student Food Collective

The Berkeley Student Food Collective works to provide healthy, sustainable, and affordable food for the East Bay community. At our volunteer-run grocery collective, the Food Collective acts as a local hub for leadership development and…

Food & Nutrition
12
Project Open Hand

Project Open Hand's mission is to improve health outcomes and quality of life by providing nutritious meals to the sick and vulnerable, caring for and educating our community.

Food & Nutrition

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bananas Incorporated and the most unlike its peers is Berkeley Crew. 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

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 12 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

MORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST INC — $108,401 · PhilanthropyMORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST INCUC Berkeley — $1,500 · OtherALS Foundation — $1,000 · OtherALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK — $1,000 · OtherGirls Inc — $600 · OtherBerkeley Crew — $600 · OtherBerkeley Humane Society — $600 · OtherBANANAS INCORPORATED — $1,000 · Human ServicesCaring Choices Inc — $500 · Human ServicesHOSPICE OF KONA INC — $500 · Human ServicesBREAKTHROUGH T1D — $1,000 · HealthTHE FOOD BASKET INC — $500 · Food & Nutrition
Philanthropy$108,401Other$5,300Human Services$2,000Health$1,000Food & Nutrition$500

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 budgetMORGAN STANLEY GLOBAL IMPACT FUNDING TRUST INC — $108,401 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK — $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBANANAS INCORPORATED — $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBREAKTHROUGH T1D — $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBerkeley Crew — $600 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE FOOD BASKET INC — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCaring Choices Inc — $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOSPICE OF KONA INC — $500 over 1y, 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.

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA3.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amazonsmile 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 Kodimer-Lutz 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
202122232425
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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 · 0–75%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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 12 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph