Skip to content

· Private foundation

Mountanos Family Foundation Inc

Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$10k
Granted FY2020
6
Grants FY2020
1
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2020.

Food & Nutrition$11kHealth$10kAnimals$8kHuman Services$3kReligion$3kOther$0
02FY2020 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UKIAH VALLEY CHRISTMAS EFFORT$2,500
MENDO SHELTER PETS RESCUE$2,100
UKIAH SENIOR CENTER$2,000
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INCWEST REG$1,500
HUMANE SOCIETY INLAND MENDOCINO COU$1,000
BONES PET RESCUE$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 (FY17–20, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%UKIAH VALLEY CHRISTMAS EFFORT: $3k → 18%UKIAH VALLEY CHRISTMAS EFFORT: $3k → 18%UKIAH VALLEY CHRISTMAS EFFORT: $3k → 18%UKIAH VALLEY CHRISTMAS EFFORT: $3k → 18%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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$28k · 8 repeat orgs$7k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2020, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
7

Total granted

$28k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+13%
+44%

Still filing today

63%
29%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20
AnimalsHuman ServicesHealthOther
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

  • UV
    UKIAH VALLEY CHRISTMAS EFFORT
    4× · 2017–2020 · $10k · revenue +13%
  • US
    UKIAH SENIOR CENTER INC
    2× · 2019–2020 · $3k · revenue +27%
  • HS
    Humane Society for Inland Mendocino County
    2× · 2019–2020 · $2k · revenue +26%

Funded once

  • RV
    REDWOOD VALLEY COMMUNITY CHURCH
    one grant, 2017 · $3k
  • UA
    UNITED ABILITY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $1k · revenue +44%
  • TP
    TEEN PAIN HELP FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $500
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
California Animal Rescue Inc

Rescue and place homeless animals

Animals
2
Humane Society of the Upper Valley

Provide spay/neuter assistance for family pets

Animals
3
Happy Valley Animals in Need

Animal rescue, veterinary care and adoption

Animals
4
California Animal Shelter Friends Inc

Providing medical and behavioral care (and animal shelter support) for animals at risk of euthanasia in animal shelters and veterinary clinics and then placing them into adoptive homes with a special focus on sick, injured and newborn dogs…

Animals
5
Solano County Friends of Animals

Animal rescue of abandoned cats and dogs

Animals
6
No Paws Left Behind

No Paws Left Behind relocates pets from high-kill shelters to save lives. Animals are being euthanized simply for lack of space in overcrowded shelters. No Paws Left Behind transports from areas oversaturated with unwanted neglected pets…

Animals
7
Menifee County Animal Shelter Inc

Provide shelter for unwanted animals

Animals
8
Spca of Stanislaus County

Protection and care of animals

Animals
9
Southern California Keeshond Rescue

Rescue and care of abandoned keeshonds

Animals
10
Phelps County Animal Rescue

provide shelter and care for dogs and cats

Animals
11
Shelters and Shelves Rescue Inc

foster based dog rescue working with shelters to save dogs

Animals
12
Mendocino Spay-Neuter Assistance Program

to administer a spay - neuter program to assist and educate members of the community who have unaltered animals

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wine Country Animals Lovers Inc; the most unlike its peers is Ukiah Senior Center Inc. 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 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $6,000 · OtherTHE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETYUKIAH SENIOR CENTER INC: $3,000 · OtherUKIAH SENIOR CENTER INCREDWOOD VALLEY COMMUNITY CHURCH: $2,500 · OtherREDWOOD VALLEY COMMUNITY CHURCHAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INCWEST REG: $1,500 · OtherAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INCWEST REGSNAP: $1,000 · OtherSNAPCANCER RESOURCE CTR OF MENDOCINO CO: $810 · Other+4 more: $1,500 · Other+4 moreUKIAH VALLEY CHRISTMAS EFFORT: $10,000 · Human ServicesUKIAH VALLEY CHRISTMAS EFFORTMendo Shelter Pets Rescue: $3,500 · AnimalsMendo Shelter Pets RescueBONES PET RESCUE: $2,500 · AnimalsBONES PET RESCUEHumane Society for Inland Mendocino County: $1,500 · AnimalsHumane Society for Inland…+1 more: $250 · AnimalsUNITED ABILITY INC: $1,000 · Health
Other$16,310Human Services$10,000Animals$7,750Health$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 budgetMendo Shelter Pets Rescue: $3,500 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetUKIAH SENIOR CENTER INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBONES PET RESCUE: $2,500 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetHumane Society for Inland Mendocino County: $1,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetUNITED ABILITY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPetaluma Animal Services Foundation: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWINE COUNTRY ANIMALS LOVERS INC: $250 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

  • Who funds UKIAH VALLEY CHRISTMAS EFFORT ↗
  • Who funds Mendo Shelter Pets Rescue ↗
  • Who funds UKIAH SENIOR CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds BONES PET RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds Humane Society for Inland Mendocino County ↗
  • Who funds UNITED ABILITY INC ↗
  • Who funds Petaluma Animal Services Foundation ↗
  • Who funds WINE COUNTRY ANIMALS LOVERS INC ↗

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.

Community Foundation of Mendocino CountyCA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Mendocino County · Network for Good · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · 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 Mountanos Family Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mountanos Family Foundation Inc. 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%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Mountanos Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph