Skip to content
Navigage Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· 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.

$818k
Granted FY2024still arriving
12
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Human Services$2.2MHealth$2.0MHousing & Shelter$402kEducation$180kPhilanthropy$150kFood & Nutrition$72kArts & Culture$45kCommunity Improvement$2kOther$0
02FY2024 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $115k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $693k
$45,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
JFS CARE$5,000
YMCA OF THE FOOTHILLS$5,000
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 (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. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%ASHBY VILLAGE: $45k → 10%ASHBY VILLAGE: $45k → 10%ON LOK DAY SERVICES: $10k → 10%VIVALON: $150k → 8%VIVALON: $150k → 8%VIVALON: $150k → 8%VIVALON: $58k → 8%VIVALON: $39k → 8%AGING NEXT: $125k → 14%VIVALON: $5k → 8%AGINGNEXT: $10k → 14%ALDERSLY: $2k → 8%PASADENA SENIOR CENTER: $100k → 14%PASADENA SENIOR CENTER: $100k → 14%PASADENA SENIOR CENTER: $100k → 14%PASADENA SENIOR CENTER: $100k → 14%PASADENA SENIOR CENTER: $5k → 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.
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.

63%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.4M · 15 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +58% since the first grant, against +28% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
22

Total granted

$3.4M
$1.8M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+58%
+28%

Still filing today

60%
32%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $230k went to new ones.

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

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHealthSocial ScienceArts & CultureReligionPhilanthropyOther
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

  • BI
    BUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING
    6× · 2019–2024 · $952k · revenue +58%
  • V
    Vivalon
    4× · 2021–2024 · $553k · revenue +66%
  • PS
    PASADENA SENIOR CENTER
    4× · 2020–2023 · $405k · revenue +68%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $500k
  • BI
    BUCK INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2018 · $155k
  • MV
    MONTE VISTA GROVE HOMES
    one grant, 2019 · $150k · revenue +12%
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
Jha Geriatric Services Inc

Excellence in senior care reflective of jewish values.

Health
2
Kendal At Sonoma a Zen Inspired Community

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.

Housing & Shelter
3
Elder Care Alliance of San Francisco

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.

Housing & Shelter
4
Northern California Congregational Retirement Homes Inc

To foster a vibrant community of engaged elders seeking holistic health, wellbeing, and purposeful living.

Human Services
5
Regional West Village

To develop, acquire, own and operate a retirement and assisted living facility.

Housing & Shelter
6
National Church Residences At Home Health and Wellness Central Ohio

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors

—
7
National Church Residences At Home Central Ohio

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors.

—
8
National Church Residences At Home Hospice Central Ohio

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors

—
9
National Church Residences At Home Hospice

Originating from a christian commitment of service, we provide high quality care, services and communities for seniors

—
10
San Francisco Village

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…

Human Services
11
The California Home for the Aged Inc Dba California Armenian Home

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…

Health
12
Senior Access

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.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Redwoods a Community of Seniors; 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.
04the grantee network

21 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. 21 of the 42 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/21
Grantees still filing
17/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $500,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientUSC LEONARD DAVIS SCHOOL OF GERONTOLOGY: $300,000 · OtherUSC LEONARD DAVIS SCHOOL OF GERONTOLOGYTHE REDWOODS A COMMUNITY OF SENIORS: $237,500 · OtherTHE REDWOODS A COMMUNITY OF SENIORSSTELLA CARVER FOUNDATION: $200,000 · OtherSTELLA CARVER FOUNDATIONBUCK INSTITUTE: $155,000 · OtherBUCK INSTITUTECovia Foundation: $150,000 · OtherCovia FoundationMONTE VISTA GROVE HOMES: $150,000 · OtherMONTE VISTA GROVE HOMESMONTE VISTA GROVE RETIREMENT COMMUNITY: $150,000 · OtherMONTE VISTA GROVE RETIREMENT COMMUNITYUSC VERDUGO HILLS FOUNDATION: $141,750 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $120,000 · OtherTHE REDWOODS RETIREMENT COMMUNITY: $100,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN: $100,000 · Other+15 more: $399,600 · Other+15 moreVivalon: $552,660 · Human ServicesVivalonPASADENA SENIOR CENTER: $405,000 · Human ServicesPASADENA SENIOR CENTERAGINGNEXT INC: $135,000 · Human ServicesAGINGNEXT INCAshby Village Inc: $90,000 · Human ServicesAshby Village Inc+2 more: $12,000 · Human ServicesBUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING: $952,000 · Social ScienceBUCK INSTITUTE FOR …USC VERDUGO HILLS HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $285,672 · HealthUSC VERDU…USC VERDUGO HILLS HOSPITAL: $100,000 · HealthUSC VERDU…SOLHEIM LUTHERAN HOME: $50,000 · HealthSOLHEIM L…ALZHEIMERS GREATER LOS ANGELES: $45,000 · HealthALZHEIMER…UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $200,000 · EducationBREAD & ROSES PRESENTS: $45,000 · Arts & CultureTHE METHUSELAH FOUNDATION: $25,000 · PhilanthropyJFS CARE: $5,000 · Religion
Other$2,703,850Human Services$1,194,660Social Science$952,000Health$480,672Education$200,000Arts & Culture$45,000Philanthropy$25,000Religion$5,000

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 budgetBUCK INSTITUTE FOR RESEARCH ON AGING: $952,000 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetVivalon: $552,660 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetPASADENA SENIOR CENTER: $405,000 over 4y, 7.1% of budgetUSC VERDUGO HILLS HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $285,672 over 3y, 5.4% of budgetTHE REDWOODS A COMMUNITY OF SENIORS: $237,500 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: $200,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCovia Foundation: $150,000 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetMONTE VISTA GROVE HOMES: $150,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetAGINGNEXT INC: $135,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetUSC VERDUGO HILLS HOSPITAL: $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetAshby Village Inc: $90,000 over 2y, 7.9% of budgetCovia Communities: $56,250 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOLHEIM LUTHERAN HOME: $50,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetBREAD & ROSES PRESENTS: $45,000 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetALZHEIMERS GREATER LOS ANGELES: $45,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTHE METHUSELAH FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYMCA OF THE FOOTHILLS: $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetON LOK DAY SERVICES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJFS CARE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PASADENA VILLAGE: $5,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetALDERSLY: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 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 BREAD & ROSES PRESENTS ↗
  • Who funds ALZHEIMERS GREATER LOS ANGELES ↗
  • 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 ↗

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.

Kaiser Foundation Hos…The San Francisco Fou…Marin Community Found…Scan Health PlanLeonard & Beryl Buck …The Rose Hills Founda…The Ahmanson Foundati…California Community …Jewish Community Fede…Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…
Kaiser Foundation HospitalsCA16.2× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Navigage Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Navigage Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 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.

    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 42 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Navigage’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