Skip to content

· Community foundation

Quakes Foundation

To provide assistance with health and fitness programs for local youth in schools and community centers, and to provide tickets for athletic events to underprivileged children.

$232k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$110k
Largest
01What it funds
0167% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2024.

Food & Nutrition$194kPhilanthropy$75kEducation$73kHealth$33kHuman Services$33kEmployment$17kCivil Rights$12kYouth Development$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $205,550, the rows itemized in this filing. The $232,077 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $26,527 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $45k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $161k
$50,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$371k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PG&E 5000 MEALS GRANT$110,050
50K MEALS$50,500
Individual grant recipient$35,000
WORKING PARTNERSHIPS USA$10,000
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 (FY18–21, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YMCA SILICON VALLEY: $2k → 8%HUNGER AT HOME: $13k → 8%BAYMEC COMMUNITY FOUNDATION - PRIDE DONATION: $1k → 8%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.

29%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$198k · 5 repeat orgs$479k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +61% since the first grant, against +4% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
49

Total granted

$198k
$273k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+61%
+4%

Still filing today

40%
24%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $206k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesEducationHealthCommunity ImprovementRecreation & SportsEnvironmentOther
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

  • M
    MISCELLANEOUS
    3× · 2020–2022 · $81k
  • P7
    PLEDGE 74
    3× · 2021–2023 · $77k
  • UF
    UFW FOUNDATION
    2× · 2020–2021 · $28k · revenue +61%

Funded once

  • SJ
    SAN JOSE STATE - EAST SIDE PROMISE SHIP - AZUSENA REYES
    one grant, 2019 · $31k
  • TT
    THE TOWER FOUNDATION OF SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITYgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $29k · revenue +41%
  • AR
    Alum Rock Union Elementary School District
    one grant, 2020 · $21k
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
California Forward

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,…

Public Benefit
2
Community Foundation Santa Cruz County

To promote philanthropy to make santa cruz county a better place to live, now and in the future.we bring together people, ideas, and resources to inspire philanthropy and accomplish great things.

Philanthropy
3
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
4
Santa Cruz Local Inc

Independent nonpartisan newsroom serving Santa Cruz County, California we are all watching and engaged in our local government, our needs are addressed, democracy works better and our community is stronger.

—
5
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
6
Northern California Grantmakers

regions most pressing social issues. We pool resources, share information, work together, and learn from each other. NCG recognizes that the challenges facing our communities are complex, entrenched and interconnected.

Philanthropy
7
Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy

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.

Community Improvement
8
California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance

California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.

Environment
9
California Donor Table

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…

Civil Rights
10
SFMade Inc

Our mission is to help manufacturers thrive, innovate, and create good jobs, for a more diverse and sustainable Bay Area.

Community Improvement
11
Active San Gabriel Valley

Active San Gabriel Valley (ActiveSGV) is a community-based environmental advocacy and public health non-profit organization. Our mission is to promote a more sustainable, equitable, and livable San Gabriel Valley.

Community Improvement
12
The San Diego Foundation

The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is North Valley Community Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Blood Cancer United Inc. 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 60 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)
18/19
Grantees still filing
10/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PG&E 5000 MEALS GRANT: $110,050 · OtherPG&E 5000 MEALS GRANTMISCELLANEOUS: $80,695 · OtherMISCELLANEOUSPLEDGE 74: $77,142 · OtherPLEDGE 7450K MEALS: $50,500 · Other50K MEALSIndividual grant recipient: $35,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSAN JOSE STATE - EAST SIDE PROMISE SHIP - AZUSENA REYES: $31,188 · OtherSAN JOSE STATE - EAST SIDE PROMISE SHIP - AZUSENA REYESUFW FOUNDATION: $27,804 · OtherAlum Rock Union Elementary School District: $21,020 · Other+37 more: $149,144 · Other+37 moreTHE TOWER FOUNDATION OF SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY: $29,192 · EducationPOSITIVE COACHING ALLIANCE: $9,542 · EducationCYPRESS MANDELA TRAINING CENTER: $5,000 · EducationNORTH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $21,885 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE NORTH STATE: $8,860 · Philanthropy+1 more: $15 · PhilanthropyBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $16,291 · HealthWorking Partnerships USA: $10,000 · HealthHUNGER AT HOME: $12,500 · Human ServicesYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SILICON VALLEY: $1,760 · Human ServicesBAYMEC COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Human ServicesLocal Color: $3,500 · Community ImprovementVEGGIELUTION: $2,500 · Community ImprovementGuadalupe River Park Conservancy: $1,500 · EnvironmentAUSTEN EVERETT FOUNDATION: $1,066 · Recreation & Sports
Other$582,543Education$43,734Philanthropy$30,760Health$26,291Human Services$15,260Community Improvement$6,000Environment$1,500Recreation & Sports$1,066

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE TOWER FOUNDATION OF SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY: $29,192 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUFW FOUNDATION: $27,804 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $16,291 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHUNGER AT HOME: $12,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWorking Partnerships USA: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPOSITIVE COACHING ALLIANCE: $9,542 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCOACHING CORPS: $8,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCYPRESS MANDELA TRAINING CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLocal Color: $3,500 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetVEGGIELUTION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF SILICON VALLEY: $1,760 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGuadalupe River Park Conservancy: $1,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSAN JOSE DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION: $1,500 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.

  • Who funds THE TOWER FOUNDATION OF SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds UFW FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds NORTH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
  • Who funds HUNGER AT HOME ↗
  • Who funds Working Partnerships USA ↗
  • Who funds POSITIVE COACHING ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE NORTH STATE ↗
  • Who funds COACHING CORPS ↗
  • Who funds CYPRESS MANDELA TRAINING CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Local Color ↗
  • Who funds VEGGIELUTION ↗

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.

Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA22.8× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · The California Endowment · The San Francisco Foundation · Rotary Club of San Jose Foundation · The Health Trust · Agilent Technologies Foundation · The Sobrato Family Foundation · Tides Foundation · John S and James L Knight Foundation · Bright Funds Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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 Quakes Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Quakes Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    8report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 Quakes Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Quakes 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 60 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 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 Quakes’ filings →

    More from the funding graph