Skip to content
Logix Community Stars Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Logix Community Stars Foundation

To Assist and Support Regional Charities

$228k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$44k
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, FY2020 to 2024.

Human Services$788kHealth$212kPublic Benefit$57kHousing & Shelter$40kEducation$15kAnimals$10kArts & Culture$5k
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$40,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$49k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PennyLane$43,700
Carousel Ranch$42,733
For The Troops$41,206
Home Again LA$40,000
Senior Concerns$40,000
Guide Dogs of America$10,000
Samuel Dixon Health Center$10,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY20–24, $314k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 71% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Burbank Temporary Aid Center: $60k → 14%Burbank Temporary Aid Center: $57k → 14%Burbank Temporary Aid Center: $50k → 14%Burbank Temporary Aid Center: $45k → 14%Senior Concerns: $40k → 10%Senior Concerns: $30k → 10%Senior Concerns: $23k → 10%Guide Dogs of America: $10k → 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.
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.
$1.0M · 5 repeat orgs$80k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
2

Total granted

$1.0M
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+3%
+38%

Still filing today

100%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $60k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHealthPublic BenefitHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • PL
    Penny Lane Centers
    5× · 2020–2024 · $287k · revenue +13%
  • BT
    BURBANK TEMPORARY AID CENTER INC
    4× · 2020–2023 · $212k · revenue +3%
  • CV
    CONEJO VALLEY SENIOR CONCERNS INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $93k · revenue +25%

Funded once

  • TC
    The College of the Canyons Foundationgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue +38%
  • JJ
    Jack & Jill of America
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
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 Samaritan Center-Simi Valley

The mission of the Samaritan Center-Simi Valley is to offer people experiencing housing and food insecurity supportive services essential to human dignity.

Housing & Shelter
2
Shelter Care Resources

Shelter Care Resources provides basic necessities to low income, homeless and foster families. We operate a food pantry, a clothing and hygiene resource center, and help individuals who are homeless or at risk of homelessness.Our mission…

Human Services
3
Santa Clarita Valley Committee On Aging

The SCVCOA and the Senior Center currently serves more than 10,000 individuals annually through varied programming for the Santa Clarita Valley and Antelope Valley that includes but is not limited to: congregate and home delivered meals…

Human Services
4
The Children's Clinic 'Serving Children and Their Families'

TCC Family Health mission is to provide innovative, integrated, quality health care that will contribute to a healthy community, focusing on those in need and working with patients and the community as partners in their overall well-being.

—
5
Southern California Alcohol and Drug Programs Inc

Substance abuse prevention, treatment, education, and co-occurring disorders that follow or originate to the same

Health
6
California Veterans Assistance

To provide programs to assist homeless veterans and veterans at risk of becoming homeless with personal skills, training and employment.

Human Services
7
Meals On Wheels-Santa Maria Valley Inc

Deliver meals and provide informal health and welfare visits to disabled and elderly clients in the Santa Maria Valley.

—
8
Council on Aging Services for Seniors

To enhance the quality of life for our aging community by providing services that promote wellbeing and maintain independence.

—
9
Candela Group

The mission of the Candela Group is to bring stability and an improved quality of life to our clients and their loved ones affected by mental illness by uniting them with public and private mental health services Our lived experience as…

Health
10
Open Arms Food Pantry & Resource Center

Our mission is to provide nutritional meal and food support, food equity programming to local communities and provide infant needs to eradicate infant mortality and abuse rates in LA County and City.

Food & Nutrition
11
Wheels of Hope La
Human Services
12
Care for the Children

Our mission is to provide homebound older adults with low income with nutritious food box delivery. Additionally, our food distribution program provides food to all in the communities we serve who need a helping hand. Our programs aim to…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Conejo Valley Senior Concerns Inc; the most unlike its peers is For the Troops. 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

9 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. 9 of the 10 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BURBANK TEMPORARY AID CENTER INC: $211,987 · Human ServicesBURBANK TEMPORARY AID CENTER IN…CONEJO VALLEY SENIOR CONCERNS INC: $92,500 · Human ServicesCONEJO VALLEY SENIOR CONCERNS I…+1 more: $10,000 · Human ServicesPenny Lane Centers: $287,329 · OtherPenny Lane CentersThe College of the Canyons Foundation: $15,179 · Other+1 more: $5,000 · OtherFOR THE TROOPS: $253,194 · Public BenefitFOR THE TROOPSCIRCLE OF HOPE INC: $202,221 · HealthCIRCLE OF HOPE INCSamuel Dixon Family Health Center Inc: $10,000 · HealthHOME AGAIN LOS ANGELES: $40,000 · Housing & Shelter
Human Services$314,487Other$307,508Public Benefit$253,194Health$212,221Housing & Shelter$40,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPenny Lane Centers: $287,329 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetFOR THE TROOPS: $253,194 over 5y, 3.5% of budgetBURBANK TEMPORARY AID CENTER INC: $211,987 over 4y, 4.1% of budgetCIRCLE OF HOPE INC: $202,221 over 5y, 27% of budgetCONEJO VALLEY SENIOR CONCERNS INC: $92,500 over 3y, 1.6% of budgetHOME AGAIN LOS ANGELES: $40,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetThe College of the Canyons Foundation: $15,179 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetInternational Guiding Eyes Inc DBA Guide Dogs of America: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSamuel Dixon Family Health Center Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

California Community …Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
California Community FoundationCA14.6× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · Network for Good · American Online Giving 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 Logix Community Stars Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Logix Community Stars Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%8%17%30%funder's 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
    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 · 0–75%
    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 Logix Community Stars Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Logix Community Stars 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 10 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 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 Logix Community Stars’ 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