Skip to content
Michael Family Foundation at a glance

· 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.

$166k
Granted FY2024still arriving
5
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$49k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Housing & Shelter$581kFood & Nutrition$314kHealth$232kHuman Services$120kInternational$115kCrime & Legal$15kOther$0
02FY2024 · 5 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$30,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$3.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION$49,200
YOUTH ASSISTANCE COALITION$45,000
SOLUTIONS FOR CHANGE$30,000
PROJECT HAWAII$21,000
HABILITAT$21,000
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 (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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%WOMEN'S CENTER YOUTH & FAMILY SERVICES: $25k → 12%FAMILY PROMISE OF HAWAII: $10k → 9%WOMEN'S CENTER FOR YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES: $25k → 12%HELPING HANDS HAWAII: $25k → 9%HELPING HANDS HAWAII: $15k → 9%HELPING HANDS HAWAII: $15k → 9%SOLUTIONS FOR CHANGE: $41k → 11%HELPING HANDS HAWAII: $15k → 9%SOLUTIONS FOR CHANGE: $40k → 11%SOLUTIONS FOR CHANGE: $30k → 11%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.
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 17% of Michael Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 64% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 47%.

Michael Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 20% 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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 11 repeat orgs$149k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
9

Total granted

$1.3M
$149k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+35%
+87%

Still filing today

100%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Human ServicesFood & NutritionHealthHousing & ShelterYouth DevelopmentPhilanthropyOther
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

  • SM
    ST MARY'S COMMUNITY SERVICES
    4× · 2017–2020 · $269k · revenue +828%
  • HI
    HABILITAT INC
    7× · 2018–2024 · $232k · revenue +49%
  • YA
    YOUTH ASSISTANCE COALITION INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $122k · revenue +16%

Funded once

  • ST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE INC
    one grant, 2021 · $45k · revenue +13%
  • EF
    EMERGENCY FOOD BANKgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +89%
  • TV
    THE VILLAGE
    one grant, 2019 · $17k
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
Family Promise of San Joaquin County

To help reduce homelessness and support low income families in san joaquin county to achieve sustainable independence through a community-based response.

Human Services
2
Family Promise of Sacramento

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…

Education
3
Family Promise of Santa Clarita Valley

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…

Housing & Shelter
4
Families in Transition Inc

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.

Human Services
5
Solano Affordable Housing Foundation
Housing & Shelter
6
Sonoma Applied Village Services

Address the homeless crisis in California.

Housing & Shelter
7
Family Promise - Salt Lake

We help families experiencing homelessness find lasting independence and security.

Housing & Shelter
8
The San Francisco Particular Council of the Society of St Vincent De Paul

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.

Human Services
9
Homefirst Services of Santa Clara County

Homefirst confronts homelessness by cultivating people's potential to get housed and stay housed.

—
10
Empowered and Dedicated to Edify the Nation Inc

Helping families permanently escape homelessness.

Human Services
11
Family Promise of San Gabriel Valley

To help families challenged with homelessness and low income achieve sustainable independence through a community-based approach.

Human Services
12
Sacramento Steps Forward

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…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Family Promise of Hawaii; 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.
05the grantee network

17 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. 17 of the 20 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/17
Grantees still filing
13/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ST MARY'S COMMUNITY SERVICES: $269,000 · Food & NutritionST MARY'S COMMUNITY SERVICESYOUTH ASSISTANCE COALITION INC: $122,202 · Food & NutritionYOUTH ASSISTANCE COALITION INCHABILITAT INC: $232,000 · HealthHABILITAT INCLUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION: $112,200 · HealthLUCKY DUCK FOUNDATIONSOLUTIONS FOR CHANGE INC: $110,510 · Human ServicesSOLUTIONS FOR CHANG…HELPING HANDS HAWAII: $70,000 · Human ServicesHELPING HANDS HAWAI…PREVAIL CA: $50,000 · Human ServicesPREVAIL CAFAMILY PROMISE OF HAWAII: $10,000 · Human Services+1 more: $2,000 · Human ServicesLA SALLE INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION INC: $115,000 · PhilanthropyLA SALLE …EMERGENCY FOOD BANK: $25,000 · OtherTHE VILLAGE: $17,175 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherSAN JOAQUIN COUNTY CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION COUNCIL: $15,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherTHE LOEL FOUNDATION: $15,000 · OtherFathers and Families of San Joaquin: $5,000 · OtherStockton Shelter For The Homeless: $95,000 · Housing & ShelterPROJECT HAWAII INC: $84,000 · Youth DevelopmentST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE INC: $45,000 · Religion
Food & Nutrition$391,202Health$344,200Human Services$242,510Philanthropy$115,000Other$107,175Housing & Shelter$95,000Youth Development$84,000Religion$45,000

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 budgetST MARY'S COMMUNITY SERVICES: $269,000 over 4y, 3.2% of budgetHABILITAT INC: $232,000 over 7y, 1.4% of budgetYOUTH ASSISTANCE COALITION INC: $122,202 over 3y, 5.5% of budgetLA SALLE INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION INC: $115,000 over 3y, 9.1% of budgetLUCKY DUCK FOUNDATION: $112,200 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetSOLUTIONS FOR CHANGE INC: $110,510 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetStockton Shelter For The Homeless: $95,000 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetPROJECT HAWAII INC: $84,000 over 3y, 2.6% of budgetHELPING HANDS HAWAII: $70,000 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetPREVAIL CA: $50,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE INC: $45,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEMERGENCY FOOD BANK: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetSAN JOAQUIN COUNTY CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION COUNCIL: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE LOEL FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetFAMILY PROMISE OF HAWAII: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFathers and Families of San Joaquin: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetGRACE AND MERCY CHARITABLE FNDN: $2,000 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

San Joaquin Community…Sunlight GivingThe Cortopassi Family…The Gap FoundationStockton Rotary Endow…Rosi Cerri Foundation…Port City Operating C…Aloha United Way IncThe Harry and Jeanett…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…The Blackbaud Giving …
San Joaquin Community Foundation IncCA17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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 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.

    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 20 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 Michael 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