· Private foundation
Michael Family Foundation
TO GRANT FUNDING TO CHARITIES/NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS THAT PROVIDE DIRECT SUPPORT AND SERVICES TO COMMUNITIES IN THE AREAS OF SHELTER, FOOD, EDUCATION AND THE PRESERVATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT.
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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION | $49,200 |
| YOUTH ASSISTANCE COALITION | $45,000 |
| SOLUTIONS FOR CHANGE | $30,000 |
| HABILITAT | $21,000 |
| PROJECT HAWAII | $21,000 |
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, $241k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 17% of Michael Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 64% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 47% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
11 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- SMST MARY'S COMMUNITY SERVICES4× · 2017–2020 · $269k · revenue +828%
- HIHABILITAT INC7× · 2018–2024 · $232k · revenue +49%
- YAYOUTH ASSISTANCE COALITION INC3× · 2022–2024 · $122k · revenue +16%
Funded once
ST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE INCone grant, 2021 · $45k · revenue +13%- EFEMERGENCY FOOD BANKgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +89%
- TVTHE VILLAGEone grant, 2019 · $17k
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.
To help reduce homelessness and support low income families in san joaquin county to achieve sustainable independence through a community-based response.
To provide temporary shelter and assistance to homeless families, and also to provide rental assistance in an effort to prevent families from becoming homeless. Program goal is to assist the families in their efforts to become…
With assistance of volunteers from the community and faith groups, the organization works to assist homeless children and their families to achieve sustainable independence, while offering hope, compassion, and preserving individual…
To join together with other service providers in a community-wide effort to end and prevent homelessness in Santa Cruz County. To provide social services, housing, and other assistance to homeless and at-risk families.
Address the homeless crisis in California.
We help families experiencing homelessness find lasting independence and security.
The mission of the st. vincent de paul society of san francisco (svdp-sf) is to offer hope and service on a direct person-to-person basis, working to break the cycles of homelessness and domestic violence.
Homefirst confronts homelessness by cultivating people's potential to get housed and stay housed.
Helping families permanently escape homelessness.
To help families challenged with homelessness and low income achieve sustainable independence through a community-based approach.
The Organization's mission is to ensure that individuals and families experiencing homelessness or the risk of homelessness are able to access housing services and resources on their path to economic stability. The Organization is the lead…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Family Promise of Hawaii and the most unlike its peers is The Loel Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
17 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. 17 of the 20 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 ST MARY'S COMMUNITY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds HABILITAT INC ↗
- Who funds YOUTH ASSISTANCE COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds LA SALLE INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds LUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SOLUTIONS FOR CHANGE INC ↗
- Who funds Stockton Shelter For The Homeless ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HAWAII INC ↗
- Who funds HELPING HANDS HAWAII ↗
- Who funds PREVAIL CA ↗
- Who funds ST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE INC ↗
- Who funds EMERGENCY FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds THE LOEL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds FAMILY PROMISE OF HAWAII ↗
- Who funds Fathers and Families of San Joaquin ↗
- Who funds GRACE AND MERCY CHARITABLE FNDN ↗
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: San Joaquin Community Foundation Inc · Sunlight Giving · The Cortopassi Family Foundation · The Gap Foundation · Stockton Rotary Endowment · Rosi Cerri Foundation Inc · Port City Operating Company LLC · Aloha United Way Inc · The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund
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 Michael Family 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.
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 Michael Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Michael 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.