Skip to content
Michael Fredrich Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Michael Fredrich Charitable 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.

$20k
Granted FY2024still arriving
20
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$9k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

Arts & Culture$41kEnvironment$18kPhilanthropy$9kYouth Development$7kFood & Nutrition$6kEducation$5kPublic Benefit$5kCommunity Improvement$3kOther$0
02FY2024 · 20 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$250
Median grant
6
States reached
$374k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UW-EC FOUNDATION SCHOLFIELD HALL 21$8,500
NORTH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB$2,500
TRI VALLEY CONSERVANCY$2,000
CITIZENS FOR BALANCED GROWTH$1,500
LIVERMORE VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CE$1,250
FRIENDS OF THE LIVERMORE LIBRARY$1,000
ALAMEDA CREEK ALLIANCE$500
OPEN HEART KITCHEN$500
TRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST$500
FOUNDATION AIDING THE ELDERLY$250
SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE$250
MANITOWOC COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY$250
SHEBOYGAN COUNTY HISTORICAL RESEARC$250
MEALS ON WHEELS$100
KALW Public Media$100
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%FRIENDS OF THE LIVERMORE LIBRARY: $1k → 10%TRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST: $500 → 11%SHEBOYGAN COUNTY HISTORICAL RESEARCH CENTER: $250 → 9%MANITOWOC COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $250 → 11%SOUTHERN UTAH WILDERNESS ALLIANCE: $250 → 8%FRIENDS OF THE LIVERMORE LIBRARY: $1k → 10%GREENBELT ALLIANCE: $500 → 10%TRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST: $500 → 11%FRIENDS OF THE LIVERMORE LIBRARY: $1k → 10%GREENBELT ALLIANCE: $500 → 10%TRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST: $500 → 11%TAHOE PROSPERITY CENTER: $3k → 10%FRIENDS OF THE LIVERMORE LIBRARY: $1k → 10%GREENBELT ALLIANCE: $500 → 10%TRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST: $500 → 11%FRIENDS OF THE LIVERMORE LIBRARY: $1k → 10%TRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST: $500 → 11%ALAMEDA CREEK ALLIANCE: $500 → 10%ALAMEDA CREEK ALLIANCE: $500 → 10%ALAMEDA CREEK ALLIANCE: $500 → 10%ALAMEDA CREEK ALLIANCE: $500 → 10%ALAMEDA CREEK ALLIANCE: $500 → 10%TRI VALLEY CONSERVANCY: $2k → 10%NORTH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB: $3k → 9%TRI VALLEY CONSERVANCY: $2k → 10%NORTH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB: $1k → 9%CITIZENS FOR BALANCED GROWTH: $2k → 10%NORTH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB: $1k → 9%TRI VALLEY CONSERVANCY: $2k → 10%NORTH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB: $1k → 9%TRI VALLEY CONSERVANCY: $2k → 10%NORTH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB: $1k → 9%TRI VALLEY CONSERVANCY: $2k → 10%CITIZENS FOR BALANCED GROWTH: $2k → 10%LIVERMORE VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CE: $1k → 10%LIVERMORE VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CE: $1k → 10%LIVERMORE VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CE: $1k → 10%CITIZENS FOR BALANCED GROWTH: $1k → 10%LIVERMORE VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CE: $1k → 10%FRIENDS OF THE VINEYARDS: $1k → 10%FRIENDS OF THE VINEYARDS: $1k → 10%LIVERMORE VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CENTER: $1k → 10%FRIENDS OF THE VINEYARDS: $1k → 10%OPEN HEART KITCHEN: $500 → 10%OPEN HEART KITCHEN: $500 → 10%OPEN HEART KITCHEN: $500 → 10%OPEN HEART KITCHEN: $500 → 10%OPEN HEART KITCHEN: $500 → 10%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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$82k · 21 repeat orgs$13k to everyone else

21 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
4

Total granted

$82k
$13k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+10%

Still filing today

71%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $100 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
EnvironmentArts & CultureFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • NH
    NORTH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $7k · revenue +8%
  • OH
    OPEN HEART KITCHEN OF LIVERMORE INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $3k · revenue +75%
  • TD
    TRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST
    5× · 2020–2024 · $3k · revenue +6%

Funded once

  • UF
    UW-EC FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $9k
  • TP
    Tahoe Prosperity Center
    one grant, 2023 · $3k · revenue +21%
  • LV
    LIVERMORE VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CENTER
    one grant, 2020 · $1k · revenue +10%
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
Northern California Regional Land Trust

The purpose of the organization is to monitor, manage, and preserve conservation easements it stewards in northern california. the organization acquires conservation easements in land exhibiting important natural features to protect and…

Environment
2
Truckee River Watershed Council

The truckee river watershed council was founded to implement locally developed public-private collaborative solutions to protect and improve water quality and biological resources for the sustainable environmental and economic health of…

Environment
3
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
4
Sierra Watch

Sierra watch secures conservation outcomes to protect the natural resources, mountain communities, and timeless values of the tahoe sierra.

Environment
5
Sequoia Riverlands Trust

We conserve the lands and waters of California's heartland.

Environment
6
Golden State Land Conservancy Inc

Promote conservation easements and resource management plans that conserve agriculture lands, forestlands, wildlife habitat, open space, and other natural resources, in perpetuity.

Environment
7
Tuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance

At Yosemite Rivers Alliance, we unite conservation and community to protect and restore the three rivers that ?ow through the Yosemite Regionthe Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and Merced.

—
8
Methow Valley Trails Collaborative

Enhancing sustainable trail experiences in the Methow Valley.

Environment
9
Sutter Buttes Regional Land Trust

The Sutter Buttes Regional Land Trust works to protect and conserve agricultural lands, open space, and wildlife habitat in Yuba, Sutter, and Colusa counties for the benefit of current and future generations

—
10
Central Sierra Environmental Resource Center Inc

CSERC protects water, wildlife, and wild places of the Northern Yosemite region.

Unclassified
11
California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance

California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.

Environment
12
Santa Cruz Mountains Trail Stewardship

Santa Cruz Mountains Trail Stewardship is creating and maintaining world-class trails responsibly, sustainably, and collectively.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Truckee Donner Land Trust; the most unlike its peers is Citizens for Balanced Growth. 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

20 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. 20 of the 27 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
13/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UW-EC FOUNDATION SCHOLFIELD HALL 21: $32,500 · OtherUW-EC FOUNDATION SCHOLFIELD HALL 21UW-EC FOUNDATION: $9,000 · OtherUW-EC FOUNDATIONNORTH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB INC: $6,500 · OtherNORTH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB INCFRIENDS OF THE LIVERMORE LIBRARY: $5,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF THE LIVERMORE LIBRARYCITIZENS FOR BALANCED GROWTH: $4,500 · OtherCITIZENS FOR BALANCED GROWTHLIVERMORE VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CE: $4,500 · OtherLIVERMORE VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CEFRIENDS OF THE VINEYARDS: $3,000 · Other+8 more: $4,400 · Other+8 moreTRI-VALLEY CONSERVANCY: $10,000 · Food & NutritionTRI-VALLEY CON…OPEN HEART KITCHEN OF LIVERMORE INC: $2,500 · Food & NutritionOPEN HEART KIT…TRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST: $2,500 · EnvironmentTRUCKEE D…ALAMEDA CREEK ALLIANCE: $2,500 · EnvironmentALAMEDA C…GREENBELT ALLIANCEPEOPLE FOR OPEN SPACE: $1,500 · EnvironmentGREENBELT…Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance: $1,250 · EnvironmentSouthern …+1 more: $200 · EnvironmentMANITOWOC COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC: $1,250 · Arts & CultureLIVERMORE VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CENTER: $1,000 · Arts & CultureCAPITAL PUBLIC RADIO FDBA KXPR/KXJZ INC: $400 · Arts & CultureKALW PUBLIC MEDIA INC: $100 · Arts & CultureTahoe Prosperity Center: $2,500 · Community Improvement
Other$69,400Food & Nutrition$12,500Environment$7,950Arts & Culture$2,750Community Improvement$2,500

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTRI-VALLEY CONSERVANCY: $10,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetNORTH HIGH BOOSTER CLUB INC: $6,500 over 5y, 3.6% of budgetCITIZENS FOR BALANCED GROWTH: $4,500 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetOPEN HEART KITCHEN OF LIVERMORE INC: $2,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST: $2,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTahoe Prosperity Center: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetALAMEDA CREEK ALLIANCE: $2,500 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetGREENBELT ALLIANCEPEOPLE FOR OPEN SPACE: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSouthern Utah Wilderness Alliance: $1,250 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION AIDING THE ELDERLY: $1,250 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetMANITOWOC COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC: $1,250 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetSHEBOYGAN COUNTY HISTORICAL RESEARCH CENTERINC: $1,250 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetLIVERMORE VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS CENTER: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBay Area Ridge Trail Council: $500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS OF STEVENS POINT: $400 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $400 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCAPITAL PUBLIC RADIO FDBA KXPR/KXJZ INC: $400 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF BLACK ROCK HIGH ROCK INC: $200 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMEALS ON WHEELS OF SHEBOYGAN COUNTY INC: $100 over 1y, 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.

The San Francisco Fou…Silicon Valley Commun…East Bay Community Fo…ImpactassetsincAmerican Endowment Fo…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…The Blackbaud Giving …Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…
The San Francisco FoundationCA13.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The San Francisco Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · Impactassetsinc · American Endowment Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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 Fredrich Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Michael Fredrich Charitable 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%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.

    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 27 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 Fredrich’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