How much did Park L Loughlin Charitable Foundation grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 49% of Park L Loughlin Charitable Foundation’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2021

sierraafghan reliefdogsmedical

2022

ukraine

2023

evacuation

2024

tahoe truckee

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k1 grant · $3k
$10k–50k4 grants · $130k
$50k–250k10 grants · $975k

$50,000

Median grant

States reached

$46M

Total assets

Largest grants

Operation Recovery$200,000
Send-it Foundation$175,000
Adventure Risk Challenge$150,000
SPCA of Northern Nevada$100,000
Humane Society of Truckee Tahoe$75,000
Friends of Tahoe Truckee Waldorf School$75,000
Hanaeleh Horse Sanctuary$50,000
Shakespeare Society of America$50,000
Safe Embrace$50,000
Tahoe Truckee Community Foundation$50,000
The Asher House$40,000
Community Foundation of Northern Nevada$40,000
The Solace Tree$25,000
Veterans Guest House$25,000
Philanthropy Roundtable$2,500

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY22–24, $800k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15% — the area typically sits at 9%. 88% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 10% of Park L Loughlin Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.

Park L Loughlin Charitable Foundationlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 10% directed abroad (not shown)

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$4.5M · 18 repeat orgs$1.4M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +75% since the first grant, against +50% for the ones you funded once.

18 repeat relationships — 11 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

Total granted

$4.5M

$1.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+75%

+50%

Still filing today

72%

50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $93k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

PhilanthropyAnimalsEnvironmentArts & CultureHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsOther

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

AR
Adventure Risk Challenge
4× · 2021–2024 · $600k · revenue +186%
HS
Humane Society of Truckee Tahoe
3× · 2021–2024 · $225k · revenue +145%
GW
Ganna Walska Lotusland
2× · 2021–2022 · $200k · revenue +204%

Funded once

GF
Gyros For Heroes Foundation
one grant, 2021 · $200k
CC
Canine Companions for Independencegraduated
one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue +76%
TD
The Doughboy Foundation
one grant, 2022 · $50k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Truckee Trails Foundation Inc

The Truckee Trails Foundation (TTF) is working towards a system of trails and bikeways in and around Truckee, California that will connect people and places, reduce our community's dependence on automobiles, and improve our physical,…

Environment

The Sierra Fund

The Sierra Fund mission is to restore ecosystem and community resiliency in the Sierra Nevada. We rely on the principles of science, stewardship, environmental justice, and policy advocacy to promote headwater resiliency for the…

Environment

Tahoe Community Foundation

Cultivating community philanthropy to enhance and preserve the quality of life at Tahoe.

Education

Sierra State Parks Foundation

The Sierra State Parks Foundation provides critically needed financial and professional support to the Lake Tahoe-Donner Sierra State Parks for Education, Restoration, and Cultural and Environmental Preservation in partnership with…

Recreation & Sports

Tahoe Rim Trail Association

To maintain and enhance the tahoe rim trail system, practice and inspire stewardship, and preserve recreational access to the natural beauty of the lake tahoe region.

Recreation & Sports

Sierra Foothill Conservancy

Protect, manage and preserve lands and wildlife having unique natural resources and cultural qualities within and near the foothills of the sierra nevada range.

Environment

California State Parks Foundation

To improve and maintain california's state parks.

Recreation & Sports

Tahoe Institute for Natural Science

To advance the natural history, conservation and ecosystem knowledge of the Tahoe region through science, education and outreach.

Environment

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

Northern California Regional Land Trust

Conservation of agricultural lands, open space, wildlife habitat and natural resources within butte, glenn, and tehama counties.

Environment

The Land Conservancy of San Luis Obispo

|to conserve and care for wildlands, farms, and ranches, and connect people to the land.

Environment

Placer Land Trust

Land conservation in Placer County, to date over 21,000 acres preserved.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Tahoe Truckee Community Foundation and the most unlike its peers is The Mono Lake Foundation. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 28 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.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/31

the rest of the field

12%

22,290/186,947

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.

06the grantee network

30 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

30/30

Grantees still filing

24/30

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$3,188,750Human Services$800,000Youth Development$600,000Animals$460,000Philanthropy$322,500Environment$245,000Arts & Culture$220,000

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.

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.

Tahoe Community FoundationNV26.2× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Tahoe Community Foundation · Tahoe Truckee Community Foundation · Martis Camp Community Foundation · Tahoe Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Jewish Community Federation of San · Marin Community Foundation · Barbara L & Richard C · The Corrigan-Walla Foundation · Sullivan Family Fund · Teichert Foundation · Community Foundation of the Napa Valley

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 organisation Park L Loughlin Charitable 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

2get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Shakespeare Society of America.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 952576354 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on Shakespeare Society of America, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 83% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Park L Loughlin Charitable Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Park L Loughlin Charitable Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

Park L Loughlin Charitable Foundation

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

30 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Park L Loughlin Charitable Foundation?

More from the funding graph

Park L Loughlin Charitable Foundation

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

30 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Park L Loughlin Charitable Foundation?

More from the funding graph