· Private foundation
Lagarde Charitable Trust
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $5k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
- $250k+1 grant · $290k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SWELL FOUNDATION | $290,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $20,000 |
| MU FILMS | $5,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 14% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +62% since the first grant, against +30% for the ones you funded once.
22 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- SFSWELL FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2025 · $731k · revenue +272% · 99% of their budget
- AEAlameda Emergency Food DBA Alameda Food Bank3× · 2017–2020 · $24k · revenue +143%
The Fistula Foundation3× · 2017–2020 · $21k · revenue +42%
Funded once
RAZOM INCone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -65%- UUUNRWA USA NATIONAL COMMITTEE INCone grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue 0%
- SWSARAH WEBSTER FABIO CENTER FOR SOCIAL JUSTICEgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $6k · revenue +242%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Namati, inc. (namati) is dedicated to putting the law in people's hands. we strive to build a just world, in which every one of us can take part in the decisions and demand accountability from the institutions that affect our lives.…
Nuru is a global collective that enables inclusive and sustainable prosperity by identifying communities at the stability tipping point, strengthening rural livelihoods and market systems, and fostering stabilizing connections that repair…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
Our mission is to build a movement of global citizens whose actions will help achieve our vision of a world without extreme poverty.
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
Human rights watch ("hrw") defends the rights of people worldwide. we scrupulously investigate abuses, expose the facts widely, and pressure those with power to respect rights and secure justice. human rights watch is an independent,…
The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environment California Inc and the most unlike its peers is Mu Films. 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.
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 35 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
30 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. 30 of the 45 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 SWELL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Alameda Emergency Food DBA Alameda Food Bank ↗
- Who funds The Fistula Foundation ↗
- Who funds Mu Films ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds Homeless Prenatal Program Inc ↗
- Who funds RAZOM INC ↗
- Who funds UNRWA USA NATIONAL COMMITTEE INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds ACCION INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds A JEWISH VOICE FOR PEACE ↗
- Who funds NEW ISRAEL FUND ↗
- Who funds SARAH WEBSTER FABIO CENTER FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds United States Association for UNHCR ↗
- Who funds MIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Guilford Land Conservation Trust Inc ↗
- Who funds JOHN MUIR HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HELP ME SEE INC ↗
- Who funds Anti Police-Terror Project Inc ↗
- Who funds SOGOREA TE LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds Planting Justice ↗
- Who funds KQED INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENT CALIFORNIA INC ↗
- Who funds KIVA MICROFUNDS ↗
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.
Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Lagarde Charitable Trust 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.
- Connecticut Foodshare Inc — 5% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Lagarde Charitable Trust?
Find your warmest path to Lagarde Charitable Trust through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.