· Public charity
Philanthropic Ventures Foundation
To engage creative donors and community partners in grassroots philanthropy via radical collaboration.
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.
The 136 grants below total $32,012,713 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $39,731,510 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $7,718,797 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k10 grants · $64k
- $10k–50k94 grants · $1.9M
- $50k–250k19 grants · $1.6M
- $250k+13 grants · $28M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BLACK CULTURAL ZONE | $15,740,134 |
| ROOTS COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER | $5,043,179 |
| 15 PERCENT PLEDGE INC | $1,731,749 |
| RESILIA ACADEMY | $1,130,224 |
| OAKSTOP LLC | $1,080,296 |
| CREATIVE MORNINGS INC | $740,052 |
| BROTHERHOOD OF ELDERS NETWORK | $579,000 |
| ACTAI GLOBAL | $468,487 |
| TURIMIQUIRE FOUNDATION | $462,000 |
| GIVE BLCK INC | $402,617 |
| TURNING BASIN LABS | $397,619 |
| CATHOLIC WORKER HOUSE | $375,000 |
| BRIGID ALLIANCE | $275,000 |
| EAST OAKLAND YOUTH DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC | $223,600 |
| TIME FOR BETTER | $134,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $4.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 50% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
Grants abroad, by region — $4.9M on the FY2024 return
Schedule F, as filed: 5 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.
Stated purpose: SOCIAL WELFARE INITIATIVES IN PARAGUAY · LAND PURCHASE AND OPERATIONS FOR SCIENCE MUSEUM · PERSONNEL AND MATERIALS FOR FIELD EXPENSES
Stated purpose: FAMILY PLANNING · EDUCATION, HEALTH & GIRLS EMPOWERMENT · WILDLIFE AND EDUCATION INITIATIVES
Stated purpose: SECONDARY SCHOOL SUPPORT · HDK DIRECTORS INNOVATION CIRCLE · DONOR OUTREACH CAMPAIGN FOR LESEDI SCHOOLS AND CLINIC
Stated purpose: SUSTAINABILITY AND COACHING FOR VENTURES · HEALTH PROGRAMS AROUND THE WORLD · TO SUPPORT THE MOVEMENTS OF BELONGING RETREAT
Stated purpose: REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH · REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH IN MEXICO · MEXFAM 2022-2024 GRANT
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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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 +44% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
180 repeat relationships — 75 still active in FY2024, 105 since wound down; 55 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, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5.1M 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
- BCBLACK CULTURAL ZONE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION2× · 2023–2024 · $16M · revenue +324%
- RCROOTS COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER4× · 2017–2024 · $5.2M · revenue +501%
- TFTURIMIQUIRE FOUNDATION INC7× · 2018–2024 · $1.2M · revenue +55% · 58% of their budget
Funded once
- RARESILIA ACADEMYone grant, 2022 · $1.3M
- ACALAMEDA COUNTY BEHAVIORAL HEALTHone grant, 2022 · $804k
- OAOakstop Allianceone grant, 2023 · $679k
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.
A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…
Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…
For more than five decades, public advocates has challenged the systemic causes of poverty and racial discrimination by strengthening community voices in public policy and achieving tangible legal victories advancing education, housing,…
Unitedly is a nonprofit organization based in San Mateo County, California. Unitedly was established to ensure Asian families and communities have access to equitable opportunities and resources to thrive in the San Francisco Bay Area.
By advocating for quality early care and education, empowering families with information and financial support, and building the capabilities of educators, Children's Council of San Francisco ensures that every child in San Francisco has…
Enterprise for youth empowers under-resourced san francisco youths to reach their potential through transformative paid internship experiences supported by a community of employers, caring adults, and peers.
The Asian Law Caucus's mission is to promote, advance, and represent the legal and civil rights of Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) communities, recognizing that social, economic, political and racial inequalities continue to exist…
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
Pangea's mission is to provide deportation defense services, advocate for policy change, and provide education and legal empowerment for our immigrant communities.
SF Partnership is an organization comprised of SF's leading employers dedicated to supporting an equitable, resilient, and vibrant economy shared by all people working and living in San Francisco. Through education, advocacy, and research,…
California Donor Table anchors a hub of donors, foundations, and community leaders. We pool together our resources to shape California into a truly democratic state that works for the people, not the powerful. Rooted in our commitment to…
Silicon Valley Social Venture Funds (SV2) mission is to unleash the talents and resources of the Bay Area community to achieve meaningful social impact. SV2 works to build the organizational capacity of our Nonprofit Grantees and Impact…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Women's Foundation of California and the most unlike its peers is Saveartspace. 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 26 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 4% 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.
502 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 502 of the 635 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 BLACK CULTURAL ZONE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds ROOTS COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER ↗
- Who funds PHILANTHROPIC VENTURES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TURIMIQUIRE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC WORKER HOSPITALITY HOUSE ↗
- Who funds Giving Gap Inc ↗
- Who funds RESTORATIVE PARTNERS INC ↗
- Who funds Oakstop Alliance ↗
- Who funds Brotherhood of Elders Network ↗
- Who funds PRESERVING AFFORDABLE HOUSING LONGTERM ↗
- Who funds Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto Inc ↗
- Who funds ACTAI GLOBAL INC ↗
- Who funds SAN JOSE PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AT THE CROSSROADS ↗
- Who funds THE BRIGID ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Northern California Grantmakers ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF BIRDLIFE INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds ST FRANCIS CENTER OF REDWOOD CITY ↗
- Who funds MERCY BEYOND BORDERS ↗
- Who funds Soup ↗
- Who funds East Oakland Youth Development Center ↗
- Who funds Equalize Health Formerly D-Rev ↗
- Who funds LIBRARIES WITHOUT BORDERS ↗
- Who funds ALAS AYUDANDO LATINOS A SONAR ↗
- Who funds LUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH ↗
- Who funds PUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR ↗
- Who funds Trust Women Foundation Inc ↗
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: The Heising-Simons Foundation · Atkinson Foundation · The Palo Alto Community Fund · The Sobrato Family Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Sunlight Giving · Sand Hill Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · United Way of the Bay Area · Women's Foundation of California · Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation · Gordon E and Betty I Moore 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 Philanthropic Ventures 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.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Stone Soup Pdx — 20% of income from government
- Social Finance Inc — 12% of income from government
- Teachers Development Group — 5% of income from government
- Sandy Hook Promise Foundation — 0% of income from government
- Oregon Shakespeare Festival Association Inc — 0% 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 Philanthropic Ventures Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Philanthropic Ventures 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.