· Private foundation
Navigage Foundation
CALIFORNIA PEO HOME DBA NAVIGAGE FOUNDATION IS FOCUSED ON ASSISTING OTHER NOT FOR PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS WITH FUNDING IN FURTHERANCE OF CARE AND SERVICE TO SENIOR CITIZENS TO IMPROVE OR ENHANCE THEIR LIFE OR LIVING ENVIRONMENT.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k2 grants · $10k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $115k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $693k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| STELLA CARVER FOUNDATION | $200,000 |
| VIVALON | $150,000 |
| THE BUCK INSTITUTE | $125,000 |
| AGING NEXT | $125,000 |
| USC VERDUGO HILLS HOPSITAL FOUNDATION | $92,836 |
| ASHBY VILLAGE | $45,000 |
| PASADENA VILLAGE FOR COMMUNITY SENIORS | $30,000 |
| BREAD & ROSES | $15,000 |
| CENTRAL NEGIHBORHOOD HEALTH FOUNDATION | $15,000 |
| ON LOK DAY SERVICES | $10,000 |
| YMCA OF THE FOOTHILLS | $5,000 |
| JFS CARE | $5,000 |
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 (FY20–24, $1.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 54% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
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 +58% since the first grant, against +28% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $230k 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
- BIBUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING6× · 2019–2024 · $952k · revenue +58%
- VVivalon4× · 2021–2024 · $553k · revenue +66%
- PSPASADENA SENIOR CENTER4× · 2020–2023 · $405k · revenue +68%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2018 · $500k
- BIBUCK INSTITUTEone grant, 2018 · $155k
- MVMONTE VISTA GROVE HOMESone grant, 2019 · $150k · revenue +12%
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.
Excellence in senior care reflective of jewish values.
An authentic, sustainable, awake, engaged community, evolving the practice of senior living in a calm, compassionate, respectful environment, informed by the teachings of wisdom and contemplative care.
A nonprofit organization committed to serving and enriching the physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being of older adults through a professional, faith-centered care community and services.
To foster a vibrant community of engaged elders seeking holistic health, wellbeing, and purposeful living.
To develop, acquire, own and operate a retirement and assisted living facility.
Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors
Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors.
Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors
Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors
San Francisco Village is an innovative membership organization that enables residents to age in their own homes. The Village is dedicated to building community connections for San Francisco residents aged 60 and older, assisted by a robust…
Building on the legacy and vision of our founders, the california armenian home, as a progressively lead non-profit community, is committed to provide a one-of-a-kind, people centered, planned senior community to serve all levels of senior…
Senior Access's mission is to help Marin's older and disabled adults remain independent and part of the community for as long as possible.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Redwoods a Community of Seniors and the most unlike its peers is University of Southern California. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 48 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
21 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. 21 of the 42 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 BUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING ↗
- Who funds Vivalon ↗
- Who funds PASADENA SENIOR CENTER ↗
- Who funds USC VERDUGO HILLS HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE REDWOODS A COMMUNITY OF SENIORS ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds Covia Foundation ↗
- Who funds MONTE VISTA GROVE HOMES ↗
- Who funds AGINGNEXT INC ↗
- Who funds USC VERDUGO HILLS HOSPITAL ↗
- Who funds Ashby Village Inc ↗
- Who funds Covia Communities ↗
- Who funds SOLHEIM LUTHERAN HOME ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMERS GREATER LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds BREAD & ROSES PRESENTS ↗
- Who funds THE METHUSELAH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds YMCA OF THE FOOTHILLS ↗
- Who funds ON LOK DAY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds JFS CARE ↗
- Who funds THE PASADENA VILLAGE ↗
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: Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · The San Francisco Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Scan Health Plan · Leonard & Beryl Buck Foundation · The Rose Hills Foundation · The Ahmanson Foundation · California Community Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation
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 Navigage 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 Navigage Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Navigage 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.