Skip to content

· Public charity

NAMI California

NAMI California is a Grass Roots Organization of Families and Individuals whose lives have been affected by serious mental illness.

$1.5M
Granted FY2025still arriving
23
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$271k
Largest
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$11MHuman Services$3.8MCommunity Improvement$83kEmployment$78kOther$0
02FY2025 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k15 grants · $370k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $828k
  • $250k+1 grant · $271k
$36,798
Median grant
1
States reached
$6.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NAMI Westside Los Angeles$271,430
MHACC$213,714
NAMI Santa Cruz Co$198,633
NAMI San Diego$139,064
NAMI Mt San Jacinto$79,695
NAMI Greater Los Angeles$78,270
NAMI San Joaquin Co$68,107
Individual grant recipient$50,500
Individual grant recipient$45,500
NAMI Contra Costa$43,614
NAMI San Francisco$43,500
NAMI Kern County$36,798
NAMI Solano County$28,000
Various$20,044
NAMI Humboldt Co$20,000
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 (FY21–21, $83k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, 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%NAMI - SANTA CRUZ: $83k → 13%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$15M · 23 repeat orgs$693k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +73% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

23 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

23
12

Total granted

$15M
$605k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+73%
0%

Still filing today

70%
58%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $88k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesArts & CultureOther
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

  • NW
    NAMI WESTSIDE LA
    5× · 2021–2025 · $1.6M · revenue +73% · 60% of their budget
  • NS
    NAMI SAN DIEGO
    8× · 2017–2025 · $1.6M · revenue +144%
  • NO
    NAMI ORANGE COUNTY
    5× · 2017–2024 · $1.5M · revenue +612%

Funded once

  • MH
    Mental Health Association For Chinese Communitiesgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $299k · revenue +43% · 34% of their budget
  • NA
    National Alliance on Mental Illness Fresno
    one grant, 2021 · $97k · revenue -26% · 34% of their budget
  • V
    VENTURESgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $83k · revenue +28%
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
Nami California

NAMI California is a Grass Roots Organization of Families and Individuals whose lives have been affected by serious mental illness. We advocate for lives of quality and respect, without discrimination and stigma, for all constituents. We…

—
2
Nami-Amador

NAMI Amador is a grassroots, family and consumer self-help support and advocacy organization dedicated to improving the lives of people with severe mental illnesses, i.e., schizophrenia, bipolar disorder (manic depression), clinical…

Health
3
Nami White Mountains Az

We represent a community of people who are committed to relieving the pain and suffering of families and peers whose lives are impacted by a Mental Health Condition. The NAMI approach has been proven to work across the United States! NAMI…

Health
4
Nami Santa Barbara County

Nami provides advocacy, education, support, public awareness so all affected by mental illness can live better lives.

Health
5
Nami Northwest

Nami is a tri-county voice for mental illness. it builds a community of hope for those with mental illness and their families, thru support, education and advocacy.

Arts & Culture
6
Nami San Mateo County

Dedicated to improving the quality of life for people with mental illness and their families through support, education, and advocacy.

—
7
Nami South King County

NAMI South King County is an organization of families, friends and individuals whose lives have been affected by mental illness. Together, we advocate for better lives for those individuals who have a mental illness. The mission of NAMI…

Health
8
Nami Montgomery County Ohio

The national alliance on mental illness (nami) is the nation's largest grassroots mental health organization, established in 1979 for mental health clients and their families as a self-help organization dedicated to providing support,…

—
9
National Alliance for Mentally Ill of Champlain Valley Inc

We provide advocacy and support for the mentally ill and their families. This personalized help is provided without charge and includes various support services aimed at assisting and encouraging those affected to better cope with their…

Health
10
Nami Glendale

Support those who suffer with mental illness as well as their family and loved ones. We offer support groups and training.

—
11
Nami Mid-Hudson Inc

NAMI Mid-Hudson is a mental health organization dedicated to building better lives for Ulster and Dutchess County residents living in New York and provides Mental Health Education,Support and Advocacy

—
12
Nami Santa Cruz County

Education, support and advocacy for mental health.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Nami Santa Clara County; the most unlike its peers is Ventures. 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

26 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. 26 of the 40 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.

9
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
25/26
Grantees still filing
14/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MHACC: $2,996,905 · OtherMHACCMental Health Assoc for Chin: $2,277,861 · OtherMental Health Assoc for ChinNAMI SAN DIEGO: $1,562,588 · OtherNAMI SAN DIEGONAMI ORANGE COUNTY: $1,483,822 · OtherNAMI ORANGE COUNTYNAMI Santa Cruz Co: $1,237,198 · OtherNAMI Santa Cruz CoIndividual grant recipient: $652,918 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $543,319 · OtherNATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS GREATER LOS ANGELES CTY(NAMI GLAC): $477,605 · Other+17 more: $618,861 · OtherNAMI WESTSIDE LA: $1,588,158 · HealthNAMI WESTSIDE LANAMI URBAN LOS ANGELES: $670,404 · HealthNAMI URBAN LOS ANGELESNAMI Sacramento: $376,295 · HealthNAMI SacramentoMental Health Association For Chinese Communities: $299,324 · HealthMental Health Association …NAMI SANTA CLARA COUNTY: $245,635 · HealthNAMI SANTA CLARA COUNTYNAMI - MT SAN JACINTO INCORPORATED: $243,328 · HealthNAMI - MT SAN JACINTO INCO…NAMI Contra Costa: $174,164 · Health+4 more: $117,379 · HealthVENTURES: $83,143 · Human ServicesNAMI KERN COUNTY CHAPTER: $81,119 · Human ServicesNAMI Butte County: $73,000 · Human ServicesNATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR THE MENTALLY ILL STANISLAUS: $30,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$11,851,077Health$3,714,687Human Services$237,262Arts & Culture$30,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNAMI WESTSIDE LA: $1,588,158 over 5y, 60% of budgetNAMI SAN DIEGO: $1,562,588 over 8y, 6.4% of budgetNAMI ORANGE COUNTY: $1,483,822 over 5y, 14% of budgetNAMI URBAN LOS ANGELES: $670,404 over 6y, 33% of budgetNATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS GREATER LOS ANGELES CTY(NAMI GLAC): $477,605 over 2y, 17% of budgetNAMI Sacramento: $376,295 over 4y, 65% of budgetMental Health Association For Chinese Communities: $299,324 over 1y, 34% of budgetNAMI SANTA CLARA COUNTY: $245,635 over 3y, 11% of budgetNAMI - MT SAN JACINTO INCORPORATED: $243,328 over 8y, 80% of budgetNAMI Contra Costa: $174,164 over 4y, 4.7% of budgetNational Alliance on Mental Illness Fresno: $96,810 over 1y, 34% of budgetNAMI SAN FRANCISCO: $93,906 over 5y, 14% of budgetVENTURES: $83,143 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetNAMI KERN COUNTY CHAPTER: $81,119 over 4y, 34% of budgetNAMI Butte County: $73,000 over 2y, 73% of budgetNAMI SOLANO COUNTY: $54,799 over 4y, 4.8% of budgetNAMI Sonoma County: $48,217 over 5y, 3.3% of budgetNAMI SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY: $33,398 over 3y, 23% of budgetNATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR THE MENTALLY ILL STANISLAUS: $30,000 over 1y, 31% of budgetNami Monterey County: $17,000 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetNAMI SAN BERNARDINO AREA: $12,250 over 2y, 16% of budgetNAMI MERCED COUNTY: $11,000 over 1y, 9.7% of budgetNAMI - VENTURA COUNTY: $8,890 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetNAMI POMONA VALLEY: $6,398 over 1y, 8.8% 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.

  • Who funds NAMI WESTSIDE LA ↗
  • Who funds NAMI SAN DIEGO ↗
  • Who funds NAMI ORANGE COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds NAMI URBAN LOS ANGELES ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS GREATER LOS ANGELES CTY(NAMI GLAC) ↗
  • Who funds NAMI Sacramento ↗
  • Who funds Mental Health Association For Chinese Communities ↗
  • Who funds NAMI SANTA CLARA COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds NAMI - MT SAN JACINTO INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds NAMI Contra Costa ↗
  • Who funds National Alliance on Mental Illness Fresno ↗
  • Who funds NAMI SAN FRANCISCO ↗
  • Who funds VENTURES ↗
  • Who funds NAMI KERN COUNTY CHAPTER ↗
  • Who funds NAMI Butte County ↗
  • Who funds NAMI SOLANO COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds NAMI Sonoma County ↗
  • Who funds NAMI SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR THE MENTALLY ILL STANISLAUS ↗
  • Who funds Nami Monterey County ↗
  • Who funds NAMI SAN BERNARDINO AREA ↗
  • Who funds NAMI MERCED COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds NAMI - VENTURA COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds NAMI POMONA VALLEY ↗
  • Who funds NAMI Alameda County ↗
  • Who funds NAMI LONG BEACH AREA ↗

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.

NAMI NationalVA30.3× affinity12 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: NAMI National · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Dignity Health · Sempra Foundation · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift 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 NAMI California funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from NAMI California. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%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
    12report 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 40 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 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 NAMI California’s filings →

    More from the funding graph