Skip to content
Michelle Odom Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Michelle Odom Foundation

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$56k
Granted FY2023
4
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$40k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Health$42kCrime & Legal$38kYouth Development$30kPhilanthropy$30kCommunity Improvement$29kScience & Tech$25kFood & Nutrition$24kHuman Services$10kOther$0
02FY2023 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k3 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $40k
$5,148
Median grant
3
States reached
$1.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
DOWN SYNDROME NETWORK OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY INC$40,105
FOOD RUNNERS$5,148
FIVE BUCKETS FOUR SHOVELS FOUNDATION$5,148
RAPE ABUSE AND INCEST NATIONAL NETWORK INC$5,148
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, $52k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%TIBETAN NYINGMA RELIEF FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%DOWN SYNDROME NETWORK OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY INC: $40k → 15%DOWN SYNDROME NETWORK OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY INC: $2k → 15%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.

74%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$188k · 6 repeat orgs$65k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +40% since the first grant, against +19% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
4

Total granted

$188k
$65k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+40%
+19%

Still filing today

100%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’20’21’22’23
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementHealthYouth DevelopmentPublic BenefitOther
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

  • DS
    Down Syndrome Network of Montgomery County Inc
    2× · 2021–2023 · $42k · revenue +435%
  • Rape Abuse & Incest National Network
    3× · 2021–2023 · $38k · revenue +15%
  • TF
    THE FIVE BUCKETS FOUR SHOVELS FOUNDATION
    4× · 2020–2023 · $30k · revenue +142%

Funded once

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION - SEATTLE
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $24k
  • TN
    Tibetan Nyingma Relief Foundation
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +19%
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
San Francisco Drug Users Union Dba Health Initiatives forthe Tenderloin

San Francisco Drug Users Union advocates at the local, state, and federal level forthe protection and promotion of the health and wellness of people who use drugs.

Health
2
Bay Area Resource for Newcomers

Burma Refugee Families & Newcomers is a not-for-profit organization located in Oakland, California, that provides support and empowers refugees of all ethnic groups from Burma and other countries resettling in the San Francisco Bay area.

Human Services
3
Law Foundation of Silicon Valley

The Law Foundation uses the law as a tool for change. The Law Foundation addresses problems linked to social injustices like poverty, discrimination, child abuse, and neglect. Every day, our attorneys, social workers, and advocates craft…

Crime & Legal
4
San Francisco Green Film Festival

San Francisco Green Film Festival's (SFGFF) mission is to educate and connect communities through forward thinking programs of environmental films, dialogues, and action opportunities.

—
5
Sacramento Lgbt Community Center

The Center works to create a region where all LGBTQ+ people thrive; we support health and wellness,advocate for equity and justice, and work to uplift our diverse and culturally rich LGBTQ+ community.

—
6
Advance Sf

Advance SF is an organization comprised of SF's leading employers dedicated to supporting an equitable, resilient, and vibrant economy shared by all people working and living in San Francisco through education, advocacy, and research. The…

Human Services
7
Daily Bowl

The mission of Daily Bowl is to glean, produce and distribute food and providing jobs to the community.

Food & Nutrition
8
Sf Partnership

SF Partnership is an organization comprised of SF's leading employers dedicated to supporting an equitable, resilient, and vibrant economy shared by all people working and living in San Francisco. Through education, advocacy, and research,…

—
9
The Sierra Fund

The Sierra Fund (TSF) is a non-profit organization with a mission to restore ecosystem and community resiliency in the Sierra Nevada.

Environment
10
Mfdp Sf Mark Foehringer Dance Project Sf

Professional dance organization focused on creating presenting dance performances and outreach activities and admission free outdoor dance festival and workshops in San Francisco

Arts & Culture
11
The Swinerton Foundation

The swinerton foundation helps build sustainable cities and neighborhoods by partnering with community-focused non-profit organizations to support health, social services, cultural, education, and environmental programs that benefit all…

Philanthropy
12
San Francisco Film Society

SFFILM is a nonprofit organization whose mission ensures independent voices in film are welcomed, heard, and given the resources to thrive. SFFILM connects and inspires audiences, students and teachers, and filmmakers through our film…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is San Francisco Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender Community Center; the most unlike its peers is Tibetan Nyingma Relief Foundation. 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

8 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. 8 of the 10 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION - SEATTLE: $25,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDAT…FOOD RUNNERS: $24,139 · OtherFOOD RUNNERSIndividual grant recipient: $23,757 · OtherIndividual grant recipientDown Syndrome Network of Montgomery County Inc: $42,105 · Human ServicesDown Syndrome Network o…Tibetan Nyingma Relief Foundation: $10,000 · Human ServicesTibetan Nyingma Relief …Rape Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN): $38,192 · HealthRape Abuse & Ince…THE FIVE BUCKETS FOUR SHOVELS FOUNDATION: $30,148 · Youth DevelopmentTHE FIVE BUCK…THE SD MAYER FOUNDATION: $30,000 · Public BenefitTHE SD MAYER …SAN FRANCISCO LESBIAN GAY BISEXUAL TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY CENTER: $23,000 · Community ImprovementSAN FRANCISCO…Bolinas Community Inc: $6,000 · Community ImprovementBolinas Commu…
Other$72,896Human Services$52,105Health$38,192Youth Development$30,148Public Benefit$30,000Community Improvement$29,000

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 budgetDown Syndrome Network of Montgomery County Inc: $42,105 over 2y, 24% of budgetRape Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN): $38,192 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE FIVE BUCKETS FOUR SHOVELS FOUNDATION: $30,148 over 4y, 12% of budgetTHE SD MAYER FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 2y, 29% of budgetFOOD RUNNERS: $24,139 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO LESBIAN GAY BISEXUAL TRANSGENDER COMMUNITY CENTER: $23,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetTibetan Nyingma Relief Foundation: $10,000 over 1y, 7.8% of budgetBolinas Community Inc: $6,000 over 1y, 2.8% 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.

Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO7.1× affinity6 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Michelle Odom Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Michelle Odom Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get 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 · 0–75%
    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 10 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Michelle Odom’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