· Private foundation
Nathan M Ohrbach Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $27k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UC BERKELEY STONE CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP | $17,000 |
| COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS | $13,000 |
| REDWOOD TRAILS ALLIANCE | $10,000 |
| NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION | $10,000 |
| HARPER FOR KIDS | $7,500 |
| SAVE MOUNT DIABLO | $6,000 |
| CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY | $5,000 |
| LANDPATHS | $5,000 |
| NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH | $3,500 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY21–24, $23k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +24% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS INC5× · 2021–2025 · $47k · revenue +3%- STSAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE2× · 2022–2024 · $30k · revenue +24%
- HFHarper For Kids Inc5× · 2021–2025 · $30k · revenue +16%
Funded once
- TRTHE RAINBOW TRANSFORMATIONS FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2024 · $8k
- TRTHE RHYTHM STUDION (CAF AMERICA FISCAL SPONSOR)one grant, 2021 · $6k
EO WILSON BIODIVERSITY FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -61%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…
The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.
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.
To ensure coast redwood forests in the santa cruz mountains thrive for generations to come. since 1900, sempervirens has protected more than 36,000 acres. learn more about our mission, vision, and strategic plan through 2030 at:…
Wildlands Network works to reconnect, restore and rewild North America so that life-in all its diversity-can thrive.
Create and publish educational materials, conduct professional development, promote awareness, and sponsor research on the spectacular biological diversity of the State of CA.
We empower runners to protect public lands, engage in climate action, and expand access to nature for all. Runners are motivated to be involved in their local communities to protect cherished landscapes and expand access to nature.…
ReScape addresses climate change by providing a regenerative, nature-based whole systems foundation for landscaping education, workforce development and policy.Foundational to our work is a whole systems watershed framework that…
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…
The organization protects and enhances the local environment through education, advocacy and legal action.
The Elkhorn Slough Foundation's mission is to conserve and restore Elkhorn Slough and its watershed, California's largest tidal salt marsh south of San Francisco Bay. Renowned for its extraordinary biodiversity, Elkhorn Slough features a…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Justice Outside and the most unlike its peers is National Jewish Health. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
19 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 19 of the 26 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS INC ↗
- Who funds SAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds Harper For Kids Inc ↗
- Who funds SAVE MOUNT DIABLO ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH ↗
- Who funds REDWOOD TRAILS ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds LandPaths ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds Smith River Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds THE RAINBOW TRANSFORMATIONS FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds INNOCENCE PROJECT NEW ORLEANS ↗
- Who funds EO WILSON BIODIVERSITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The First 72 ↗
- Who funds Feed the Second Line ↗
- Who funds BORDER ANGELS ↗
- Who funds LOUISIANA CENTER FOR CHILDREN'S RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds JUSTICE OUTSIDE ↗
- Who funds Sonoma Valley Education Foundation ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: Marin Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Clif Family Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Sonoma County Community Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · The Greater New Orleans Foundation · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · National Philanthropic Trust
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Nathan M Ohrbach Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Nathan M Ohrbach Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Nathan M Ohrbach Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.
Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.