Skip to content
Miranda Leigh Nelson Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Miranda Leigh Nelson 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.

$9k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$1k
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, FY2021 to 2025.

Health$15kAnimals$12kEnvironment$4k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,400
Median grant
2
States reached
$125k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Mental Health Association of Orange County$1,400
Free Rein Foundation$1,400
Animal Welfare Institute$1,400
Red Bucket Equine Rescue$1,400
NAMI California$1,400
Wetlands and Wildlife Care Center$1,400
Huntington Beach Tree Society Inc$1,000
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 (FY23–23, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Emily's Hope: $1k → 9%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.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$22k · 7 repeat orgs$8k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
7

Total granted

$22k
$6k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-14%
-13%

Still filing today

86%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

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

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

’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEnvironmentHealthHuman ServicesOther
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

  • RB
    RED BUCKET EQUINE RESCUE
    5× · 2021–2025 · $5k · revenue -32%
  • AW
    ANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE
    4× · 2022–2025 · $4k · revenue -17%
  • OC
    ORANGE COUNTY ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH
    3× · 2022–2025 · $3k · revenue +20%

Funded once

  • TD
    THE DAVID SHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUST USA INCgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue +37%
  • DH
    DIDI HIRSCH PSYCHIATRIC SERVICE
    one grant, 2024 · $1k · revenue -13%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF THE SEA LIONS INC DBA PACIFIC MARINE MAMMAL CENTER
    one grant, 2023 · $1k · revenue -37%
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
Wild Souls Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation
Animals
2
Forever Wild Wildlife Rescue
Animals
3
Orange County Wildlife Foundation
Animals
4
J&R Aquatic Animal Rescue
Environment
5
North Bay Animal Services
Animals
6
Orange Twins Rescue
Animals
7
Wolfe Ranch Rescue
Animals
8
Starfish Animal Rescue
Animals
9
Wet Mountain Wildlife Rehabilitatio
—
10
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
—
11
Angel Wing Acres Animal Welfare Soc Lombas
Animals
12
2nd Chance Ranch and Rescue

Sanctuary for abused or abandoned animals

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Orange County Association for Mental Health; the most unlike its peers is Red Bucket Equine Rescue. 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

12 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. 12 of the 16 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
4/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

RED BUCKET EQUINE RESCUE: $4,800 · AnimalsRED BUCKET EQUINE RESCUEANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $4,300 · AnimalsANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTEWetlands and Wildlife Care Center: $2,500 · AnimalsWetlands and Wildlife Care CenterTHE DAVID SHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUST USA INC: $1,300 · AnimalsTHE DAVID SHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUST USA INCFRIENDS OF THE SEA LIONS INC DBA PACIFIC MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $1,000 · AnimalsFRIENDS OF THE SEA LIONS INC DBA PACIFIC MARINE MAMMAL…Last Chance for Animals: $500 · AnimalsORANGE COUNTY ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH: $3,300 · OtherORANGE COUNTY ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTHNAMI California: $3,200 · OtherNAMI CaliforniaAnxiety and Depression Association: $2,100 · OtherAnxiety and Depression AssociationNAMI ORANGE COUNTY: $1,600 · OtherNAMI ORANGE COUNTYFree Rein Foundation: $1,400 · OtherFree Rein FoundationOrange County Association: $500 · Other+1 more: $100 · OtherDIDI HIRSCH PSYCHIATRIC SERVICE: $1,300 · HealthHUNTINGTON BEACH TREE SOCIETY INC: $1,000 · EnvironmentEmilys Hope: $1,000 · Human Services
Animals$14,400Other$12,200Health$1,300Environment$1,000Human Services$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$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetRED BUCKET EQUINE RESCUE: $4,800 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetANIMAL WELFARE INSTITUTE: $4,300 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetORANGE COUNTY ASSOCIATION FOR MENTAL HEALTH: $3,300 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetNAMI California: $3,200 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetWetlands and Wildlife Care Center: $2,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetNAMI ORANGE COUNTY: $1,600 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE DAVID SHELDRICK WILDLIFE TRUST USA INC: $1,300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDIDI HIRSCH PSYCHIATRIC SERVICE: $1,300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUNTINGTON BEACH TREE SOCIETY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE SEA LIONS INC DBA PACIFIC MARINE MAMMAL CENTER: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEmilys Hope: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLast Chance for Animals: $500 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.

Orange County Communi…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Orange County Community FoundationCA13.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Orange County Community Foundation · 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 Miranda Leigh Nelson Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Miranda Leigh Nelson 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%6%13%19%25%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–25%
    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 16 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 Miranda Leigh Nelson’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