· Public charity
Powerpac Foundation
To promote civic engagement and voter participation in minority, low-income, and other historically underrepresented communities.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MISSION ECONOMIC DEV AGENCY | $30,000 |
| EAST BAY ASIAN LOCAL DEV CORP | $30,000 |
| THE UNITY COUNCIL | $30,000 |
| TENDERLOIN NEIGHBORHHOD DEV C | $30,000 |
| COMMUNITY HOUSING DEV CORP | $30,000 |
| ARIZONA CENTER FOR EMPOWERMT | $25,000 |
| CENTER FOR CIVIC ENGAGEMENT | $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 (FY20–20, $125k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 14% of Powerpac 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.
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.
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,…
Ebase advances economic, racial and social justice by building a just economy in the east bay on good jobs and healthy communities. we address the root causes of economic injustice by developing strategic alliances amount community, faith…
CAUSE's mission is to build grassroots power to realize social, economic and environmental justice for the people of the Central Coast Region through policy research, leadership development, organizing and advocacy.
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…
Connecting and amplifying the power of individuals to build a just, equitable, and inclusive city.
To build livable and economically viable communities in the low income areas of This is accomplished by Greater Los Angeles strengthening the skils and self-sufficiency of residents, businesses of residents, businesses and community…
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.
Silicon Valley Rising Action takes on occupational segregation and income inequality with a comprehensive campaign to raise wages, create affordable housing, and build a tech economy that works for everyone.
Mid-city community advocacy network works to build a safe, productive, and healthy community for the residents of city heights and greater san diego through collaboration, advocacy, and organizing.
The California Center for Movement Legal Services (Movement Legal) provides legal services in the pursuit of improving the lives of California's traditionally underserved residents, carrying out legal work that fosters community led policy…
Nuestra Casa exists to uplift Latino families in East Palo Alto and the mid-peninsula through community education, leadership and advocacy
Provide Educational Programs, Health Services and Legal Services to Farm Workers at housing sites and throughout the Salinas Valley and promote improved living conditions.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Chinatown Community Development Center and the most unlike its peers is Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 30 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 8% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
21 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. 21 of the 22 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 UNITE HERE EDUCATION AND SUPPORT FUND ↗
- Who funds GAMMA BOULE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND ↗
- Who funds KEYS EMPOWERS INC ↗
- Who funds CASA INC ↗
- Who funds CHINATOWN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
- Who funds BRIGHTLINE DEFENSE PROJECT ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP OF NORTH RICHMOND ↗
- Who funds MISSION ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY ↗
- Who funds TENDERLOIN NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds EAST BAY ASIAN LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds SPANISH SPEAKING UNITY COUNCIL OF ALAMEDA COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds Working Partnerships USA ↗
- Who funds EQUALITY ALLIANCE OF SAN DIEGO ↗
- Who funds ARIZONA CENTER FOR EMPOWERMENT ↗
- Who funds Asian Pacific Environmental Network ↗
- Who funds Evolve Mentoring ↗
- Who funds Communities For A New California Education Fund ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY COALITION FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT ↗
- Who funds Strategic Concepts In Organizing & Policy Education ↗
- Who funds CENTER ON CIVIC ENGAGEMENT ↗
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 San Francisco Foundation · Evelyn and Walter Haas Jr Fund · The California Endowment · United Way of the Bay Area · The James Irvine Foundation · Enterprise Community Partners Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Loud Hound Foundation · Tipping Point Community
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 Powerpac 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.
- Casa Inc — 8% 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 Powerpac Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Powerpac 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.