Skip to content
Nathan M Ohrbach Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Nathan M Ohrbach Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$77k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$17k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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.

Environment$141kHousing & Shelter$47kYouth Development$30kRecreation & Sports$28kArts & Culture$23kHealth$20kCrime & Legal$17kCivil Rights$8kOther$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $27k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $50k
$7,500
Median grant
5
States reached
$585k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
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 (FY21–24, $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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%BORDER ANGELS: $5k → 11%FEED THE SECOND LINE: $5k → 23%THE FIRST 72: $5k → 23%THE RAINBOW TRANSFORMATIONS FOUNDATION: $8k → 14%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.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
CA
CO
VA
AZ
NC
DC
LA
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.

75%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$243k · 12 repeat orgs$83k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +24% since the first grant, against 0% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
12

Total granted

$243k
$56k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
0%

Still filing today

83%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 65% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27k 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
EnvironmentHuman ServicesCrime & LegalPhilanthropyYouth DevelopmentRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS INC
    5× · 2021–2025 · $47k · revenue +3%
  • ST
    SAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE
    2× · 2022–2024 · $30k · revenue +24%
  • HF
    Harper For Kids Inc
    5× · 2021–2025 · $30k · revenue +16%

Funded once

  • TR
    THE RAINBOW TRANSFORMATIONS FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2024 · $8k
  • TR
    THE RHYTHM STUDION (CAF AMERICA FISCAL SPONSOR)
    one grant, 2021 · $6k
  • NR
    NATIONAL RESOURCE DEFENSE COUNCIL
    one grant, 2024 · $5k
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
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
2
Nature Collective

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…

Environment
3
CalWild

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.

—
4
Tuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance

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.

—
5
Sempervirens Fund

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:…

Environment
6
Wild Earth Society Incorporated

Wildlands Network works to reconnect, restore and rewild North America so that life-in all its diversity-can thrive.

Arts & Culture
7
California Institute for Biodiversity

Create and publish educational materials, conduct professional development, promote awareness, and sponsor research on the spectacular biological diversity of the State of CA.

Education
8
Runners for Public Lands

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.…

Environment
9
Rescape California

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…

Environment
10
Sustainable Conservation

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…

Environment
11
Environmental Defense Center

The organization protects and enhances the local environment through education, advocacy and legal action.

Crime & Legal
12
Elkhorn Slough Foundation

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…

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Justice Outside; 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.
04the grantee network

19 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. 19 of the 26 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
11/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COALITION FOR THE HOMELESS INC: $46,500 · OtherCOALITION FOR THE HOMELESS INCMIRIAM'S HOUSE: $17,500 · OtherMIRIAM'S HOUSETHE RHYTHM STUDIO (CAF AMERICA FISCAL SPONSOR): $17,361 · OtherTHE RHYTHM STUDIO (CAF AMERICA FISCAL SPONSOR)UC BERKELEY STONE CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP: $17,000 · OtherUC BERKELEY STONE CENTER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STEWAR…REDWOOD TRAILS ALLIANCE: $10,000 · OtherREDWOOD TRAILS ALLIANCETHE RHYTHM STUDION (CAF AMERICA FISCAL SPONSOR): $6,000 · OtherNATIONAL RESOURCE DEFENSE COUNCIL (NRDC): $5,000 · OtherLOS COURAGE CAMPS: $5,000 · OtherCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC: $10,000 · OtherCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC+3 more: $7,000 · OtherSAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE: $30,000 · EnvironmentSAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUENATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $24,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION…LandPaths: $10,000 · EnvironmentLandPathsSmith River Alliance Inc: $10,000 · EnvironmentSmith River Alliance IncEO WILSON BIODIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $5,000 · EnvironmentEO WILSON BIODIVERSITY FOUN…Harper For Kids Inc: $29,500 · Youth DevelopmentHarper For…SAVE MOUNT DIABLO: $27,000 · Recreation & SportsSAVE MOUN…THE RAINBOW TRANSFORMATIONS FOUNDATION INC: $7,500 · Human ServicesBORDER ANGELS: $5,000 · Human ServicesThe First 72: $5,000 · Human ServicesFeed the Second Line: $5,000 · Human ServicesNATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH: $14,500 · HealthINNOCENCE PROJECT NEW ORLEANS: $7,000 · Crime & LegalLOUISIANA CENTER FOR CHILDREN'S RIGHTS: $5,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$141,361Environment$79,000Youth Development$29,500Recreation & Sports$27,000Human Services$22,500Health$14,500Crime & Legal$12,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOALITION FOR THE HOMELESS INC: $46,500 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetSAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHarper For Kids Inc: $29,500 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetSAVE MOUNT DIABLO: $27,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $24,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH: $14,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetREDWOOD TRAILS ALLIANCE: $10,000 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetLandPaths: $10,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSmith River Alliance Inc: $10,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetINNOCENCE PROJECT NEW ORLEANS: $7,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetEO WILSON BIODIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBORDER ANGELS: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLOUISIANA CENTER FOR CHILDREN'S RIGHTS: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe First 72: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFeed the Second Line: $5,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetJUSTICE OUTSIDE: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSonoma Valley Education Foundation: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

Marin Community Found…The San Francisco Fou…Clif Family FoundationAmalgamated Charitabl…Sonoma County Communi…Resources Legacy FundThe Greater New Orlea…Gordon E and Betty I …The David and Lucile …Shell USA Company Fou…Jewish Communal FundNational Philanthropi…
Marin Community FoundationCA18.5× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Nathan M Ohrbach Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Nathan M Ohrbach 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    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.

    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 26 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 Nathan M Ohrbach’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