· Public charity
Rebuild North Bay Foundation
Our mission is to guide communities through the complex journey of recovery in the era of megafires, fostering sustainable rebuilding and long-term preparedness.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 5 grants below total $395,174 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $967,138 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $571,964 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
- $10k–50k3 grants · $115k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $280k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NAPA COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT | $177,806 |
| MENDOCINO COUNTY RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT | $102,582 |
| SONOMA RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT | $46,336 |
| GOLD RIDGE RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT | $40,246 |
| CLEAR LAKE ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER | $28,204 |
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, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 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 19% of Rebuild North Bay 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. Read by recipient address, 77% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 38% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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.
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 +1020% since the first grant, against +35% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- CLClear Lake Environmental Research Center4× · 2020–2024 · $93k · revenue ×29
- OAOccidental Arts and Ecology Center2× · 2021–2022 · $87k · revenue +122%
- VFVOLUNTEER FIRE FOUNDATION2× · 2020–2021 · $50k · revenue ×11 · 42% of their budget
Funded once
- R3RSG 3-D SERVICES GROUP LLCone grant, 2019 · $440k
- HFHABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF SONOMA COUNTYone grant, 2019 · $60k · revenue -49%
- LRLarkfield Resilience Fund Incone grant, 2019 · $45k · 38% 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.
Homes for Sonoma is a nonprofit developer creating quality workforce housing options that support safe and sustainable community, and finds efficient, scalable solutions to address the housing crisis in Sonoma County and throughout…
Public benefit, fire prevention & education
Address the homeless crisis in California.
The Chile-California Council is a San Francisco-based nonprofit dedicated to developing and promoting joint endeavors and cooperative relations between Chile and California, as well as individuals, legal entities and other institutions in…
Planning and participation in activities to increase safety and reduce fire hazards in the Eastern Madera County area.
Protect the people of amador county and their property from the effects of catastrophic fires through education, cooperation, innovation and action
Sustainable Contra Costa conducts educational outreach campaigns workshops and events to help people and communities live sustainably and build healthy communities.
TO support sonoma county fire district fire safety
Promoting wildfire safety through education and action in the ojai valley area.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Los Cien Sonoma County Inc and the most unlike its peers is Ukiah Foundation for Commerce & Education. 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 30 years old; the field is 20. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 17% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
24 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. 24 of the 41 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 Clear Lake Environmental Research Center ↗
- Who funds Occidental Arts and Ecology Center ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY OF SONOMA COUNTY ↗
- Who funds VOLUNTEER FIRE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Larkfield Resilience Fund Inc ↗
- Who funds NORTH COAST BUILDERS EXCHANGE INC ↗
- Who funds NUESTRA COMUNIDAD ↗
- Who funds EMERALD EARTH SANCTUARY ↗
- Who funds UKIAH FOUNDATION FOR COMMERCE & EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF MENDOCINO COUNTY ↗
- Who funds SONOMA VALLEY COMMUNITY COMMUNICATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds PEP Housing ↗
- Who funds LandPaths ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE OF SANTA ROSA ↗
- Who funds Lime Foundation ↗
- Who funds SCOPA HAS A DREAM INC DBA CORAZON HEALDSBURG ↗
- Who funds LOS CIEN SONOMA COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds SONOMA VALLEY COMMUNITY HEALTH CENTER ↗
- Who funds INQUIRING SYSTEMS INC ↗
- Who funds Bilingual Broadcasting Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds SONOMA VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds First Responders Resiliency ↗
- Who funds United Policyholders ↗
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: Sonoma County Community Foundation · United Way of the Wine Country · Marin Community Foundation · Redwood Credit Union Community Fund Inc · California Fire Foundation · Peter E Haas Jr Family Fund · Sonoma County Vintners Foundation · McNabb Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · Tipping Point Community · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma
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 Rebuild North Bay 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.