Skip to content
Laural Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Laural Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$19M
Granted FY2024still arriving
84
Grants FY2024still arriving
10
States reached
$1.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$33MPhilanthropy$4.9MRecreation & Sports$2.7MEducation$2.5MAnimals$1.9MHealth$1.4MSocial Science$635kFood & Nutrition$540kOther$0
02FY2024 · 84 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k9 grants · $43k
  • $10k–50k22 grants · $510k
  • $50k–250k19 grants · $1.9M
  • $250k+34 grants · $16M
$100,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$83M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATURE CONSERVANCY$1,000,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED$1,000,000
NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION$1,000,000
NEW VENTURE FUND$1,000,000
WATER FOUNDATION$1,000,000
WATER FOUNDATION$1,000,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED$500,000
NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC$500,000
ONE EARTH PHILANTHROPY$500,000
TIDES CENTER$500,000
SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION$500,000
WATERSHED SOLUTIONS NETWORK$500,000
TIDES FOUNDATION$500,000
LAND TRUST ALLIANCE INCORPORATED$500,000
PARKS CALIFORNIA$500,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 87% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%CRYSTAL SPRINGS UPLANDS SCHOOL: $250k → 7%NATIONAL DISASTER SEARCH DOG FOUNDATION INC: $250k → 10%CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $250k → 10%WATER FOUNDATION: $1.3M → 12%ONE EARTH PHILANTHROPY: $500k → 14%NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $500k → 17%NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $1.0M → 14%NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1.0M → 7%CORO NORTHERN CALIFORNIA: $500k → 10%WATER FOUNDATION: $1.0M → 12%NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY: $500k → 17%NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $1.0M → 14%THE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $500k → 7%WATER FOUNDATION: $500k → 10%SAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE: $400k → 10%PARKS CALIFORNIA: $500k → 12%LAND TRUST ALLIANCE: $800k → 14%BIG SUR LAND TRUST: $500k → 12%WATER FOUNDATION: $500k → 12%LAND TRUST ALLIANCE: $500k → 14%BIG SUR LAND TRUST: $500k → 12%PARKS CALIFORNIA: $500k → 12%LAND TRUST ALLIANCE INCORPORATED: $500k → 14%BIG SUR LAND TRUST: $500k → 12%WATER FOUNDATION: $500k → 12%PARKS CALIFORNIA: $500k → 12%WATER FOUNDATION: $350k → 12%PARKS CALIFORNIA: $330k → 12%NATUREBRIDGE: $300k → 8%PARKS CALIFORNIA: $330k → 12%NATUREBRIDGE: $275k → 8%NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $388k → 14%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1.0M → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $500k → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $500k → 17%NEW VENTURE FUND: $1.0M → 14%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $500k → 17%NEW VENTURE FUND: $500k → 14%NEW VENTURE FUND: $500k → 14%SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION: $500k → 10%SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION: $500k → 10%SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION: $500k → 10%WATER FOUNDATION: $1.0M → 12%WATER FOUNDATION: $1.0M → 12%WATERSHED SOLUTIONS NETWORK: $500k → 12%WATERSHED SOLUTIONS NETWORK: $500k → 12%NATUREBRIDGE: $500k → 10%NATUREBRIDGE: $500k → 10%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

WA
ID
NY
MA
CT
CA
CO
VA
DC
HI
GA
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 Laural Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Laural Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 4.1% 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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$37M · 46 repeat orgs$3.3M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +32% since the first grant, against -17% for those funded once.

46 repeat relationships: 37 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

46
8

Total granted

$37M
$729k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
-17%

Still filing today

89%
25%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2.6M went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentEducationHealthFood & NutritionRecreation & SportsAnimalsOther
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

  • WF
    WATER FOUNDATION
    6× · 2019–2024 · $7.5M · revenue +55%
  • ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED
    5× · 2020–2024 · $3.1M · revenue +121%
  • BS
    Big Sur Land Trust
    7× · 2018–2024 · $3.0M · revenue +186%

Funded once

  • CN
    CORO NORTHERN CALIFORNIA INC
    one grant, 2022 · $500k · revenue -17%
  • SC
    SANTA CLARA VALLEY OPEN SPACE AUTHORITY
    one grant, 2021 · $100k
  • CC
    COMMONWEALTH CLUB SF
    one grant, 2020 · $50k
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 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
2
The Sierra Fund

The Sierra Fund (TSF) is a non-profit organization with a mission to restore ecosystem and community resiliency in the Sierra Nevada.

Environment
3
California Wildlife Foundation

The foundation works with diverse groups representing many interests to acquire and restore critical wildlife habitat and protecting species

Animals
4
California Ocean Science Trust

California ocean science trust (ost) is a non-profit organization dedicated to accelerating progress towards a healthy and productive ocean future for california. created by state legislation, ost bridges the gap between cutting-edge…

Environment
5
Sempervirens Fund

To ensure coast redwood forests in the santa cruz mountains thrive for generations to come. since 1900, sempervirens has protected more than 36,000 acres. learn more about our mission, vision, and strategic plan through 2030 at:…

Environment
6
CalWild

The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.

—
7
Land Trust of Santa Cruz County

Land trust of santa cruz county (the organization) was incorporated in california as a not-for-profit corporation in 1978. the mission of the organization is to protect, care for, and connect all people to the vibrant natural and working…

Environment
8
California State Parks Foundation

California state parks foundation is an independent, member-supported nonprofit dedicated to protecting and preserving the california state park system for the benefit of all.

Recreation & Sports
9
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

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

Education
10
Santa Catalina Island Conservancy

The catalina island conservancy protects and stewards 88% of catalina island. more than 42,000 acres of wildlands, coves and coastal habitats. founded to preserve the island's natural resources, the conservancy advances a mission rooted in…

—
11
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
12
Conservation Farms & Ranches

Preserving and enhancing the habitat of wildlife, such as sandhill cranes, waterfowl, raptors, which habitat expenses are supported by agricultural activities.

Housing & Shelter
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Parks California; the most unlike its peers is San Anselmo Montessori School. 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

61 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. 61 of the 73 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
61/61
Grantees still filing
40/61
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WATER FOUNDATION: $7,500,000 · EnvironmentWATER FOUNDATIONENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $3,100,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATEDBig Sur Land Trust: $2,990,000 · EnvironmentBig Sur Land TrustLAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC: $2,750,000 · EnvironmentLAND TRUST ALLIANCE INCPARKS CALIFORNIA: $2,425,000 · EnvironmentPARKS CALIFORNIANEW VENTURE FUND: $2,000,000 · EnvironmentNEW VENTURE FUNDSustainable Conservation: $1,925,000 · EnvironmentSustainable ConservationNATUREBRIDGE: $1,875,000 · EnvironmentNATUREBRIDGE+13 more: $6,312,500 · Environment+13 moreNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC: $2,050,000 · OtherNATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY …NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $2,000,000 · OtherNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATIONTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1,600,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYPUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA (PPIC): $630,000 · OtherPUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE O…PUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA: $510,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY: $500,000 · OtherTHE HEAD ROYCE SCHOOL: $500,000 · OtherIDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC: $400,000 · OtherCORO NORTHERN CALIFORNIA INC: $500,000 · Other+22 more: $2,155,827 · Other+22 moreTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $1,107,500 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $800,000 · EducationThe Thacher School Inc: $350,000 · EducationCRYSTAL SPRINGS UPLANDS SCHOOL: $295,000 · EducationSANTA CATALINA SCHOOL: $100,000 · Education+4 more: $152,500 · EducationROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $750,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES FOUNDATION: $500,000 · PhilanthropyHUMBOLDT AREA FOUNDATION: $250,000 · Philanthropy+1 more: $20,000 · PhilanthropyTIDES CENTER: $1,350,000 · Human ServicesCraig Hospital Foundation: $300,000 · HealthNATIONAL DISASTER SEARCH DOG FOUNDATION: $250,000 · HealthMARIN GENERAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $100,000 · HealthJOHN MUIR HEALTH FOUNDATION: $100,000 · HealthLUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH: $30,000 · HealthST LUKE'S WOOD RIVER FOUNDATION INC: $30,000 · HealthMONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION: $625,000 · Animals
Environment$30,877,500Other$10,845,827Education$2,805,000Philanthropy$1,520,000Human Services$1,350,000Health$810,000Animals$625,000

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 budgetWATER FOUNDATION: $7,500,000 over 6y, 9.4% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $3,100,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetBig Sur Land Trust: $2,990,000 over 7y, 16% of budgetLAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC: $2,750,000 over 8y, 5.4% of budgetPARKS CALIFORNIA: $2,425,000 over 3y, 19% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $2,000,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $2,000,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetSustainable Conservation: $1,925,000 over 4y, 11% of budgetNATUREBRIDGE: $1,875,000 over 5y, 3.9% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1,600,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTIDES CENTER: $1,350,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $1,107,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetWatershed Solutions Network: $1,000,000 over 1y, 100% of budgetSAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE: $975,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetJohn Muir Land Trust prev Muir Heritage Land Trust: $875,000 over 5y, 7.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $800,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $750,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $745,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetMONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION: $625,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetWINDWARD FUND: $580,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetPUBLIC POLICY INSTITUTE OF CALIFORNIA: $510,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $500,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCORO NORTHERN CALIFORNIA INC: $500,000 over 1y, 9.0% of budgetTHE HEAD ROYCE SCHOOL: $500,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetONE EARTH PHILANTHROPY: $500,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetCALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $425,000 over 2y, 19% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $422,500 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetIDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC: $400,000 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetThe Thacher School Inc: $350,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetCraig Hospital Foundation: $300,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetCRYSTAL SPRINGS UPLANDS SCHOOL: $295,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetCALIFORNIA RANGELAND TRUST: $292,777 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetHUMBOLDT AREA FOUNDATION: $250,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetCENTER FOR CLIMATE AND ENERGY SOLUTIONS INC: $250,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetNATIONAL DISASTER SEARCH DOG FOUNDATION: $250,000 over 1y, 3.2% of budgetRESOURCES LEGACY FUND: $250,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK: $237,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFOUR WINDS: $232,550 over 7y, 2.1% of budgetTHE COMMONWEALTH CLUB - WORLD AFFAIRS OF CALIFORNIA: $225,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetTen Strands: $200,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetFrancisco Park Conservancy: $150,000 over 2y, 9.4% of budgetAMERICAN ACADEMY OF ARTS & SCIENCES: $125,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetMARIN GENERAL HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetAMERICAN FARMLAND TRUST: $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetJOHN MUIR HEALTH FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSANTA CATALINA SCHOOL: $100,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO: $60,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetPRESIDENT-BOARD OF TRUSTEES SANTA CLARA COLLEGE: $50,000 over 2y, 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.

The San Francisco Fou…Am Dachs FoundationEsb Charitable Founda…Marin Community Found…Resources Legacy FundGordon E and Betty I …Silicon Valley Commun…Jewish Community Fede…The William & Flora H…The David and Lucile …Evelyn and Walter Haa…The Keith Campbell Fo…
The San Francisco FoundationCA35.4× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The San Francisco Foundation · Am Dachs Foundation · Esb Charitable Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr Fund · The Keith Campbell Foundation for the Environment Inc

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 Laural Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Laural Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • American Academy of Arts & Sciences: 3% of income from government
  • Wesleyan University: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
15report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Laural Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Laural Foundation 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.

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 73 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Laural’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