Skip to content
Mendez Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Mendez Family Foundation

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.

$10k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0186% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Animals$37kHealth$10kHuman Services$9kPhilanthropy$5kEducation$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,500
Median grant
3
States reached
$188k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
OUR RESCUE$5,000
HUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEY$2,500
WET NOSES RESCUE$2,500
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 (FY21–23, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%HALE RANCH FOUNDATION: $5k → 8%HALE RANCH FOUNDATION: $3k → 8%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.

59%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$51k · 4 repeat orgs$35k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +124% since the first grant, against +7% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
5

Total granted

$51k
$28k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+124%
+7%

Still filing today

50%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 25% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHuman ServicesHealthArts & CultureEducationEnvironmentOther
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

  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEY
    3× · 2023–2025 · $23k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    2× · 2021–2022 · $20k
  • HR
    HALE RANCH FOUNDATION
    2× · 2021–2023 · $8k · revenue +124%

Funded once

  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $11k · revenue +55%
  • AC
    AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -80%
  • LT
    Lake Tahoe Wildlife Care Inc
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -35%
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
California Animal Rescue and Education Sanctuary Inc

C.A.R.E.S.MISSION STATEMENT*Rescue, foster and find good homes for abandoned and homeless domestic and farm animals.*Spay/neuter abandoned and homeless cats and dogs, as well as help low income families with same.*Conduct TNR+ programs to…

—
2
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
3
Conservation Society of California

Through management of oakland zoo, the conservation society of california deepens connection with animals, saves wildlife, and inspires champions for the natural world.

Animals
4
The San Francisco Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

To ensure every companion animal has access to quality medical care, compassionate shelter, and a loving home.

Animals
5
The California Wildlife Center

The california wildlife center (cwc) takes responsibility for the protection of all native wildlife through rehabilitiation, education and conservation. as the los angeles area's premier wildlife medical care and rehabilitation facility,…

Health
6
High Sierra Animal Rescue Inc

High Sierra Animal Rescues mission is to save the lives of homeless dogs in the regions served. Our staff and volunteers are dedicated to making our communities better through successful adoptions advancing their welfare and creating human…

Animals
7
Wolfe Ranch Rescue
Animals
8
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County

The SPCA Monterey County's Mission is assuring compassionate treatment of all animals through rescue, rehabilitation, protection and education. The SPCA shelters homeless, neglected, and abused pets, including dogs, cats, horses, exotic…

Animals
9
Noco Humane

Our mission is to further the compassionate safe and responsible relationship between animals and people.

Animals
10
Rancho Coastal Humane Society

See schedule orancho coastal is dedicated to the rescue and shelter of abandoned companion animals. it encourages adoptions into loving homes and provides educational and community outreach programs designed to enhance the human-animal…

Animals
11
El Dorado County Humane Society

Care for shelter animals, provide public with free spay/neuter services, educational outreach.

Animals
12
Willows Wags and Whiskers

Wags and whiskers pet rescue is a 501(c)(3) non-profit all breed, no kill, animal rescue organization, incorportated in august 2015. we are a vounteer driven group with a number of years experience with animals and rescue.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tahoe Family Solutions Inc; the most unlike its peers is California Waterfowl Association. 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

10 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. 10 of the 12 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

HUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEY: $22,500 · OtherHUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEYIndividual grant recipient: $20,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientLake Tahoe Wildlife Care Inc: $5,000 · OtherLake Tahoe Wildlife Care Inc+2 more: $1,690 · OtherHUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEY: $11,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY S…WET NOSES RESCUE: $2,500 · AnimalsWET NOSES RESCUEAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $10,000 · HealthAMERICAN CAN…HALE RANCH FOUNDATION: $8,000 · Human ServicesHALE RANC…El Dorado Community Foundation: $5,000 · PhilanthropyOUR RESCUE: $5,000 · Arts & CultureVALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS: $1,000 · Education
Other$49,190Animals$13,500Health$10,000Human Services$8,000Philanthropy$5,000Arts & Culture$5,000Education$1,000

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 budgetHUMANE SOCIETY SILICON VALLEY: $11,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHALE RANCH FOUNDATION: $8,000 over 2y, 3.2% of budgetLake Tahoe Wildlife Care Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetEl Dorado Community Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetOUR RESCUE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetVALLEY CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA WATERFOWL ASSOCIATION: $850 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTAHOE FAMILY SOLUTIONS INC: $840 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.

Silicon Valley Commun…Morgan Stanley Global…Vanguard Charitable E…American Endowment Fo…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA12.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Mendez Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mendez Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
    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 Mendez Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Mendez Family 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 12 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Mendez Family’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