· Private foundation
Point Break 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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
74% of Point Break Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 7 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
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
- $10k–50k3 grants · $73k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $343k
- $250k+3 grants · $2.1M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FIDELITY CHARITABLE GIFT FUND | $1,350,000 |
| ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS | $500,000 |
| UTAH FILM CENTER | $250,000 |
| NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN FUND INC | $150,000 |
| SURFRIDER FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| BRITISH SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES FOUNDATION INC | $93,300 |
| CREATIVE VISIONS FOUNDATION | $38,000 |
| SEVEN ARROWS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL | $25,000 |
| ROCKHOUSE FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
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 (FY22–22, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, 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.
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 +46% since the first grant, against +25% for the ones you funded once.
4 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 3 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, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $313k 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
- NYNEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN FUND INC2× · 2022–2024 · $250k · revenue +46%
- BSBRITISH SCHOOLS & UNIVERSITIES FOUNDATION INC2× · 2022–2024 · $203k · revenue +133%
- TSTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION2× · 2023–2024 · $125k · revenue +1%
Funded once
- TSThe Sarah Min and Matt Pincus Foundationgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $1.9M · revenue +289%
- WBWire BNY Mellon Charitable Gift Fundone grant, 2021 · $625k
- TTThink Twice Drink Twice Foundationone grant, 2017 · $600k · revenue -100% · 75% of their budget
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.
Providing philanthropists, foundations and family offices access to social investment expertise by allowing the donors to give tax deductible donations worldwide through a social investment market.
The ucla foundation is the giving, receiving, and investing arm of the ucla campus. the foundation enables private donors to help build, sustain and advance one of the world's finest academic and research institutions. private philanthropy…
The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.
The leadership foundation, inc. (the foundation), established in 1990, is the mechanism by which iwf members advance the next generation of women leaders. the foundation accelerates the careers of top-performing women by offering…
Working with our world-class network of innovators, business and industry leaders, and policy experts, we accelerate the innovation of climate technologies at every stage - from discovery to development to deployment.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Seven Arrows Elementary School and the most unlike its peers is Think Twice Drink Twice Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
16 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. 16 of the 25 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 FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
- Who funds The Sarah Min and Matt Pincus Foundation ↗
- Who funds BNY MELLON CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
- Who funds ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC ↗
- Who funds Think Twice Drink Twice Foundation ↗
- Who funds NEW YORK-PRESBYTERIAN FUND INC ↗
- Who funds UTAH FILM CENTER ↗
- Who funds BRITISH SCHOOLS & UNIVERSITIES FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SCHOOL OF LEADERSHIP-AFGHANISTAN INC ↗
- Who funds THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL DOCUMENTARY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CREATIVE VISIONS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds EXHALE TO INHALE INC ↗
- Who funds SEVEN ARROWS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds ROCKHOUSE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MALIBU FOUNDATION FOR YOUTH AND FAMILIES ↗
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: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Network for Good · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Point Break 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.
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 Point Break Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Point Break 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.