· Private foundation
Pacific Youth Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k5 grants · $14k
- $10k–50k16 grants · $423k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $477k
- $250k+1 grant · $284k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SOCIAL EMOTIONAL WELLNESS INITIATIV | $283,500 |
| BOYS GIRLS CLUB OF WHITTIER | $223,900 |
| BOYS GIRLS CLUB OF WHITTIER | $168,900 |
| BOYS GIRLS CLUB OF HAWAII | $84,000 |
| BOYS GIRLS CLUB OF FONTANA | $47,500 |
| BOYS GIRLS CLUBS OF CATHEDRAL CITY | $47,500 |
| BOYS GIRLS CLUB OF SAN MARCOS | $44,000 |
| BOYS GIRLS CLUB OF WHITTIER | $43,000 |
| BOYS GIRLS CLUB - SANTA CLARITA VAL | $42,000 |
| SOCIAL EMOTIONAL WELLNESS INITIATIV | $32,828 |
| BOYS GIRLS CLUB - SANTA CLARITA VAL | $30,000 |
| BOYS GIRLS CLUB OF SANTA MONICA | $30,000 |
| WORLD FEDERATION OF YOUTH CLUBS | $25,000 |
| WORLD FEDERATION OF YOUTH CLUBS | $15,000 |
| WORLD FEDERATION OF YOUTH CLUBS | $15,000 |
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 (FY18–24, $1.8M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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 +93% since the first grant, against +51% for the ones you funded once.
37 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2024, 25 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- BABOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF WHITTIER INC4× · 2017–2020 · $1.9M · revenue +623% · 30% of their budget
- SESOCIAL & EMOTIONAL WELLNESS INITIATIVE6× · 2019–2024 · $1.8M · revenue +23% · 90% of their budget
- BABOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SANTA MONICA INC4× · 2017–2020 · $1.4M · revenue +46%
Funded once
- CDCLUB DE NINOS Y NINAS CDMX Y ESTADO DE MEXICOone grant, 2019 · $100k
- LCLA COUNTY ALLIANCE FOR BOYS GIRLS Cone grant, 2021 · $94k
- SBSouth Bay Youth Clubs Incone grant, 2017 · $44k
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.
To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring and responsible citizens.
To provide opportunities for youth to learn and succeed.
The club's mission is to enable all young people, specially those who need it most, to reach their potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens.
Enable young people, especially those from disadvantaged circumstances to realize their full potential as productive, responsible & caring citizens.
Operate and run a boys and girls club for merced, california
The club provides a safe environment for children in the santa barbara area to develop self-esteem, values and skills.
To inspire and enable all young people, especially those most in need of our services, to realize and develop their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens in a global society.
To inspire and enable all young people especially those in need to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens.
To enable and inspire all young people, ages five to eighteen, especially those who need us most, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible, and caring citizens.
Enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens
Provide youth ages 5-17 with character development, leadership skills, education, career guidance, training for healthy habits, and life skills development to help them reach their full potential as caring, productive, responsible citizens.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Boys & Girls Clubs of the Olympic Peninsula and the most unlike its peers is Mckinley Elementary School Pta. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 40 years old; the field is 14. 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 — 2% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
53 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. 53 of the 81 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 BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF WHITTIER INC ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL & EMOTIONAL WELLNESS INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SANTA MONICA INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF HAWAII ↗
- Who funds THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY ALLIANCE FOR BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF CATHEDRAL CITY ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SAN MARCOS ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF FONTANA ↗
- Who funds WORLD YOUTH CLUBS INC ↗
- Who funds CLUB DE NINOS Y NINAS DE MEXICO INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF LONG BEACH ↗
- Who funds MALIBU FOUNDATION FOR YOUTH AND FAMILIES ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF SILICON VALLEY ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SAN FRANCISCO ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE NORTH VALLEY ↗
- Who funds The Antelope Valley Boys and Girls Club ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF EL DORADO COUNTY WESTERN SLOPE ↗
- Who funds South Bay Youth Clubs Inc ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF THE SOUTH COAST AREA ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF KOOTENAI COUNTY IDAHO INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF OAKLAND ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CORVALLIS INC ↗
- Who funds THE BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE OLYMPIC PENINSULA ↗
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: Boys & Girls Clubs of America · Boys & Girls Clubs of America (Group Return) · Rite Aid Healthy Futures · Good360 · California Community Foundation · M J Murdock Charitable Trust · Ford Philanthropy · Dick's Sporting Goods Foundation · The Los Angeles County Alliance for Boys and Girls Clubs · The Albertsons Companies Foundation · The Gap Foundation · The Rose Hills 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 Pacific Youth 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.
- Boys & Girls Club of Corvallis Inc — 16% of income from government
- Boys & Girls Club of Albany — 7% of income from government
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 Pacific Youth Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Pacific Youth 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.