Skip to content
Phelps Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Phelps Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$4.4M
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$1.2M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2024.

Philanthropy$3.9MArts & Culture$1.0MEducation$77kHealth$63kYouth Development$52kEnvironment$30kHuman Services$23kCrime & Legal$20kOther$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,194,930
Median grant
4
States reached
$64k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WILLIAM AND ANDREA PHELPS FAMILY FUND$1,194,930
THE LAP CHARITABLE FUND$1,194,930
THE TODD AND LAURIE ANDERSON FUND$1,023,687
LYNN PHELPS AND RICHARD FINCH CHARITABLE FUND$999,122
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 (FY19–21, $43k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%SAN FRANCISCO FORTY NINERS FOUNDATION: $2k → 8%UPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS: $10k → 9%49ERS FOUNDATION: $2k → 8%COLLABRIA CARE: $10k → 9%COLLABRIA CARE: $10k → 9%COLLABRIA CARE: $10k → 9%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.

5%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$260k · 14 repeat orgs$4.5M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +46% since the first grant, against +18% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
9

Total granted

$260k
$52k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+18%

Still filing today

57%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4.4M went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’24
Youth DevelopmentHuman ServicesEducationPhilanthropyEnvironmentOther
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

  • IG
    IF GIVEN A CHANCE
    3× · 2019–2021 · $30k · revenue +385%
  • CC
    COLLABRIA CARE
    3× · 2019–2021 · $30k · revenue +54%
  • OH
    OLE HEALTH FOUNDATION
    3× · 2019–2021 · $30k · revenue +125%

Funded once

  • NE
    NAPA EMRGENCY WOMEN'S SERVICE
    one grant, 2019 · $10k
  • CULINARY INSTITUTE OF AMERICA
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +18%
  • UF
    UPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS OF NAPA COUNTY
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +18%
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
Napa Valley Grapegrowers Foundation

Cultivate viticultural excellence and environmental stewardship for the napa valley, to be a local and global leader for a science-based approach to grape growing and agricultural stewardship, to ensure the viability and resiliency of…

Food & Nutrition
2
League of California Community Foundations

The league of california community foundations promotes and strengthens community foundations in california. through collaboration and shared learning among member foundations and building partnerships with private and public entities, we…

Philanthropy
3
Solano Community Foundation

The Solano Community Foundation strengthens Solano County by advancing equity, supporting nonprofit resilience, and expanding access to philanthropy. We serve as a community leader, responsive grantmaker, and trusted partner for donors who…

Philanthropy
4
Santa Fe Community Foundation

The santa fe community foundation inspires philanthropic generosity, strengthens nonprofits, and fosters positive change to build a more vibrant, healthy, and resilient region. the foundation's vision is a thriving northern new mexico,…

Philanthropy
5
Cfnv Charitable Real Estate Fund Co the Community Foundation of Napa Valley

The corporation operates exclusively for charitable purposes by conducting or supporting activities for the benefit of, or to carry out the purposes of the community foundation of the napa valley dba napa valley community foundation…

Philanthropy
6
Junior Achievement of Northern California

To inspire and prepare young people to succeed in a global economy. junior achievement programs correlate between the common core and california content standards. ja's proven volunteer-based delivery model merged with the latest…

International
7
Coronanorco Family Ymca

The y works to strengthen our community through programming that helps develop members by concentrating on nurturing the potential of every child, teen and adult. the y has three areas of focus- youth development, healthy living, and…

Human Services
8
Pasadena Bio Collaborative Incubator

Pasadena bio collaborative incubator is a nonprofit organization focused on economic development and job creation in southern california. we encourage the growth of an innovative biotechnology industry by providing educational/training…

Science & Tech
9
National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors

Empowering financial professionals and consumers through world-class advocacy and education.

—
10
Naval Postgraduate School Foundation Inc

Our mission is to support the naval postgraduate school by providing funding and programmatic support for education, research, technology development, institutional initiatives, and community programs that advance national security and…

Education
11
Sonoma Valley Education Foundation

The Sonoma Valley Education Foundation exists to improve education by enriching teaching, inspiring learning, and advancing innovative programs that enable every student to succeed.

Philanthropy
12
National Guard Youth Foundation

The foundation raises national awareness about the high school completion crisis and impact on our nation's youth, economy and national security. our efforts are primarily directed to developing, supporting and enhancing the national guard…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Foundation of the Napa Valley; the most unlike its peers is Inland Empire Community Foundation. 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 31 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)
17/19
Grantees still filing
16/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE LAP CHARITABLE FUND: $1,194,930 · OtherTHE LAP CHARITABLE FUNDWILLIAM AND ANDREA PHELPS FAMILY FUND: $1,194,930 · OtherWILLIAM AND ANDREA PHELPS FAMILY FUNDTHE TODD AND LAURIE ANDERSON FUND: $1,023,687 · OtherTHE TODD AND LAURIE ANDERSON FUNDLYNN PHELPS AND RICHARD FINCH CHARITABLE FUND: $999,122 · OtherLYNN PHELPS AND RICHARD FINCH CHARITABLE FUND+13 more: $148,500 · OtherGS DONOR ADVISED PHILANTHROPY FUND FOR WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC: $171,243 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE NAPA VALLEY: $90,537 · PhilanthropyInland Empire Community Foundation: $48,000 · PhilanthropyOLE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $30,000 · PhilanthropyFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $195,808 · Community ImprovementCOLLABRIA CARE: $30,000 · Human ServicesUPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS OF NAPA COUNTY: $10,000 · Human ServicesSAN FRANCISCO FORTY NINERS FOUNDATION: $3,000 · Human ServicesIF GIVEN A CHANCE: $30,000 · EducationCULINARY INSTITUTE OF AMERICA: $10,000 · EducationNAPA COUNTY LAND TRUST: $30,000 · EnvironmentGIRLS ON THE RUN NAPA & SOLANO INC DBA GIRLS ON THE RUN NORTH BAY: $15,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF ST HELENA AND CALISTOGA INC: $3,500 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SONOMA VALLEY BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SONOMA VALLEY: $1,000 · Youth Development
Other$4,561,169Philanthropy$339,780Community Improvement$195,808Human Services$43,000Education$40,000Environment$30,000Youth Development$19,500

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 budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $195,808 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGS DONOR ADVISED PHILANTHROPY FUND FOR WEALTH MANAGEMENT INC: $171,243 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE NAPA VALLEY: $90,537 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetInland Empire Community Foundation: $48,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNAPALEARNS (THE NAPA VALLEY PARTNERSHIP FOR 21ST CENTURY EDUCATION): $40,000 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetIF GIVEN A CHANCE: $30,000 over 3y, 2.4% of budgetCOLLABRIA CARE: $30,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetOLE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetNAPA COUNTY LAND TRUST: $30,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetGIRLS ON THE RUN NAPA & SOLANO INC DBA GIRLS ON THE RUN NORTH BAY: $15,000 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetST HELENA VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT: $11,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetCULINARY INSTITUTE OF AMERICA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUPVALLEY FAMILY CENTERS OF NAPA COUNTY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSt Helena Public Schools Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF ST HELENA AND CALISTOGA INC: $3,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO FORTY NINERS FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetNAPA MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION: $3,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetBOYS CLUB OF NAPA INC BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF NAPA VALLEY: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SONOMA VALLEY BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SONOMA VALLEY: $1,000 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.

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.

Community Foundation …Craig and Kathryn Hal…McMinn FoundationE Richard Jones Famil…Napa Valley Vintners …McNabb FoundationKaiser Foundation Hos…Marin Community Found…American Endowment Fo…Npt Charitable Asset …The Boeschen Family F…The David Butler Fami…
Community Foundation of the Napa ValleyCA26.2× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of the Napa Valley · Craig and Kathryn Hall Foundation · McMinn Foundation · E Richard Jones Family Foundation Mr E Richard Jones · Napa Valley Vintners Healthy Community Fund · McNabb Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Marin Community Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Npt Charitable Asset Trust · The Boeschen Family Foundation · The David Butler Family 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 Phelps Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Phelps Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 Phelps Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Phelps 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 31 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 Phelps’ 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