How much did PHILANTHROPIC VENTURES FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

Community Improvement$17MHealth$7.1MPhilanthropy$5.1MHuman Services$4.4MEducation$4.0MArts & Culture$2.4MInternational$2.3MCrime & Legal$1.5MEnvironment$1.4MOther$23M

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

2018

inn mentalhealth technologytechnology pilottndcwe'vebelieve everyoneeveryone deserves

2019

media outreachtripelementaryballetcanaan countryinfographicscommunications

2020

covidgivingdistance learningemotionalcampcleftnatural

2021

translationhate virusspanishlanguage accessrelationsblockspopulation

2022

staff mentalassignmentassigneehate virusamericansassignorcreditors

2023

mpactclientsoaklandersoakstopsensitiveartistsyoung women

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

03FY2024 · 136 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k10 grants · $64k
$10k–50k94 grants · $1.9M
$50k–250k19 grants · $1.6M
$250k+13 grants · $28M

$25,000

Median grant

States reached

$89M

Total assets

Largest grants

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

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 (FY17–24, $4.2M) land where the poverty rate runs at 10% — the area typically sits at 10%. 50% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

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.

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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$49M · 187 repeat orgs$19M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +62% since the first grant, against +54% for the ones you funded once.

187 repeat relationships — 78 still active in FY2024, 109 since wound down; 56 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

187

395

Total granted

$49M

$14M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+62%

+54%

Still filing today

89%

73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5.1M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesEducationHealthPhilanthropyArts & CultureInternationalOther

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

BC
BLACK CULTURAL ZONE
2× · 2023–2024 · $16M · revenue +785%
RC
ROOTS COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER
4× · 2017–2024 · $5.2M · revenue +426%
TF
TLC FOR KIDS SPORTS
6× · 2017–2024 · $3.0M · revenue +576%

Funded once

RA
RESILIA ACADEMY
one grant, 2022 · $1.3M
AC
ALAMEDA COUNTY BEHAVIORAL HEALTH
one grant, 2022 · $804k
OL
OAKSTOP LLC
one grant, 2023 · $679k

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.

Jobs with Justice San Francisco

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,…

Employment

Unitedly

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.

Human Services

California Forward

California forward (ca fwd) brings people together across regions to improve government and create resilient growth statewide.

Public Benefit

California Competes

California Competes: Higher Education for a Strong Economy is a nonpartisan policy and research organization focused on identifying solutions to the states most critical challenges at the intersection of higher education, equity, and the…

Education

Asian Americans Advancing Justice -

The mission of AAAJ-ALC is to promote, advance, and represent the legal and civil rights of Asian Pacific Islander (API) communities, recognizing that social, economic, political and racial inequalities continue to exist in the United…

Crime & Legal

Women's Foundation of California

Women's foundation of california amplifies the voices and experiences of community leaders, redistributes knowledge, power, and resources, and mobilizes communities and funders to advance justice for all.

—

Forward Together

Forward Together unites communities to win rights, recognition and resources for allfamilies.We transform culture and policy to work for all of us nationwide. Since ourfounding in 1989, we have continually fought to dismantle the ways our…

Health

Center for Domestic Peace

Center for Domestic Peace mobilizes individuals and communities to transform our world so domestic violence no longer exists, creating greater safety, justice, and equality.

Human Services

Family Violence Law Center

Family Violence Law Center ("FVLC") helps diverse communities in Alameda County heal from domestic violence and sexual assault, advocating for justice and healthy relationships. We provide survivor-centered legal and crisis intervention…

Crime & Legal

The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education

California Water Data Consortium

The California Water Data Consortium is an independent, nonprofit organization created by a partnership of state agencies and others to ensure that Californians have access to the best possible water and ecological information to make…

Science & Tech

Institute for Public Strategies

to work alongside communities to build power, challenge systems of injustice, protect health, and improve quality of life.

Health

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is People Acting in Community Together and the most unlike its peers is Start Early. 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 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.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

2%13/599

the rest of the field

12%

22,284/186,379

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.

05the grantee network

501 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)

162

Early backer (in before they grew)

488/501

Grantees still filing

380/501

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$28,486,928Community Improvement$16,704,641Health$7,068,168Philanthropy$5,136,029Human Services$4,362,134Education$3,979,258Arts & Culture$2,363,672

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.

The Heising-Simons FoundationCA117.2× affinity79 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Heising-Simons Foundation · Atkinson Foundation · The Palo Alto Community Fund · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · The Sobrato Family Foundation · Sunlight Giving · Sand Hill Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Los Altos Mountain View · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · United Way of the Bay Area · Embarcadero Media 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 organisation 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

4get 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: PAHALI COMMUNITY LAND TRUST.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~38 months of operating runway; revenue contracted over 4 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 471378241 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 PAHALI COMMUNITY LAND TRUST, 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

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 38 months of cash on hand.
WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 78% 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 Philanthropic Ventures Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Philanthropic Ventures 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.

PHILANTHROPIC VENTURES 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?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

501 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Philanthropic Ventures Foundation?

More from the funding graph

PHILANTHROPIC VENTURES 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?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

501 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Philanthropic Ventures Foundation?

More from the funding graph