· Private foundation
Lorne and Ilona Parker 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k32 grants · $79k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $33k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| CASA DE LOVE ANIMAL RESCUE | $33,000 |
| PD CONNECT | $8,500 |
| SAN GERONIMO VALLEY COMM CENTER | $5,500 |
| OSHER MARIN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER | $5,000 |
| ACLU FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH | $4,000 |
| FISTULA FOUNDATION | $4,000 |
| MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION | $4,000 |
| SEVA FOUNDATION | $3,000 |
| UCSF BENIOFF CHILDREN'S HOSPITALS F | $3,000 |
| PARTNERS IN HEALTH | $3,000 |
| MARIN VENTURES | $3,000 |
| IN SPIRIT | $3,000 |
| SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER | $2,000 |
| MARIN DANCE THEATRE | $2,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $146k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of those 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 +51% since the first grant, against +21% for the ones you funded once.
40 repeat relationships — 28 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $7k 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
- MVMARIN VENTURES6× · 2017–2024 · $128k · revenue +23%
- CDCASA DE LOVE ANIMAL RESCUE6× · 2018–2024 · $114k · revenue +271%
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC7× · 2017–2024 · $37k · revenue +102%
Funded once
- S3SCI 365 RECOVERYINQUIRING SYSTEMS Ione grant, 2018 · $10k
- ROREGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT IRVINEone grant, 2019 · $5k
- SGSAN GERONIMO VALLY COMM CNTRone grant, 2019 · $5k
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.
Mission statement: mission: caring for our patients first and our people always. vision: to be the most comprehensive, integrated and connected health system for getting and staying well. values: excellence - we deliver high-quality,…
MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…
The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.
The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.
The ucla foundation is the giving, receiving, and investing arm of the ucla campus. the foundation enables private donors to help build, sustain and advance one of the world's finest academic and research institutions. private philanthropy…
The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.
The Institute is a scientific research center dedicated to conducting basic and applied research to advance the understanding of human disease and the improvement of human health. The Institute fosters an innovative research environment…
The central mission of the university of southern california is the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit. the principal means by which our mission is…
Kaiser foundation for the advancement of integrated health care is a nonprofit 501(c)(4) advocacy organization to engage in proactive advocacy to promote understanding of the benefits of integrated care and coverage, and support of the…
See schedule othe mission of ucsf health medical foundation is threefold: 1) to establish, operate and maintain medical clinics for the provision of healthcare services in california; 2) to promote health by providing, coordinating,…
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…
Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress, understand the root causes of disease, and narrow the gap between discoveries and impact on patients.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is California Pacific Medical Center Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Ph Foundation. 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 45 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 — 2% 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.
40 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. 40 of the 65 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 MARIN VENTURES ↗
- Who funds CASA DE LOVE ANIMAL RESCUE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds The Fistula Foundation ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds IN SPIRIT ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL OFFSITE CARE ↗
- Who funds SEVA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BERNARD OSHER MARIN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
- Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA IRVINE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MARIN ACADEMY ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PARKINSON'S FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds KANPE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND ↗
- Who funds MARIN DANCE THEATRE ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE AMISTAD RESEARCH CENTER ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR YAD VASHEM INC ↗
- Who funds GLIDE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE WOOSTER GROUP INC ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION FOR STUDENTS RISING ABOVE ↗
- Who funds PH FOUNDATION ↗
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: Marin Community Foundation · McNabb Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc
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 Lorne and Ilona Parker 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.
- Mercy Corps — 47% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 0% 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.