How much did REDWOOD CREDIT UNION COMMUNITY FUND grant in FY2024?

Philanthropy$6.3MHuman Services$4.5MCommunity Improvement$2.0MHealth$1.6MFood & Nutrition$642kArts & Culture$399kHousing & Shelter$318kEducation$281kYouth Development$104kOther$4.9M

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

relief survivorssurvivors northnorth baybay fires

2019

peerkincade firerelief

2020

—

2021

employee givingfinancial

2022

marshall firefire disasterdisaster reliefdisaster preparednessemployee giving

2023

capitalemotionalrespondersmembersemployee giving

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

03FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k1 grant · $8k
$10k–50k3 grants · $49k
$50k–250k2 grants · $165k
$250k+1 grant · $300k

$25,000

Median grant

States reached

$10M

Total assets

Largest grants

CHILDREN'S MUSEUM OF SONOMA COUNTY$300,000
GREEN MUSIC CENTER$100,000
FIRST RESPONDERS RESILIENCY$65,000
NAPA VALLEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION$25,000
MARIN SYMPHONY ASSOCIATION$12,038
MARIN PERFORMING STARS$12,038
DOGWOOD ANIMAL RESCUE PROJECT$8,048

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 (FY17–22, $4.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 10% — the area typically sits at 9%. 18% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

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.

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 6% of REDWOOD CREDIT UNION COMMUNITY FUND’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, 98% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 61% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

REDWOOD CREDIT UNION COMMUNITY FUNDlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 37% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

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.

69%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$15M · 21 repeat orgs$6.5M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +57% since the first grant, against +51% for the ones you funded once.

21 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2024, 18 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$15M

$6.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+57%

+51%

Still filing today

90%

88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 33% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $349k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesHealthPhilanthropyEducationCommunity ImprovementArts & CultureOther

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

CF
CENTER FOR VOLUNTEER AND NONPROFIT LEADERSHIP
2× · 2017–2018 · $1.3M · revenue +138%
LL
LA LUZ CENTER
2× · 2017–2018 · $900k · revenue +30% · 38% of their budget
CC
CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE
4× · 2017–2021 · $866k · revenue +18%

Funded once

CH
CALIFORNIA HUMAN DEVELOPMENTgraduated
one grant, 2017 · $500k · revenue +32%
PETALUMA HEALTH CENTER INCgraduated
one grant, 2018 · $391k · revenue +71%
C
COTSgraduated
one grant, 2018 · $300k · revenue +158%

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.

Community Housing Sonoma County

Community Housing Sonoma County creates supportive housing communities for people living with disabling conditions, especially veterans.

Housing & Shelter

Northern California Center for

To improve the health and well-being of our community through evidence-based health practices and innovative programs that advance health equity for all.

Health

Homes for California

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…

Housing & Shelter

Sonoma Ecology Center

The Mission of Sonoma Ecology Center is to work with our community to enhance and sustain ecological health in the Sonoma valley.

Environment

Napa Valley Community Housing

To develop, own and manage affordable housing for low income residents of napa county.

Health

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

Nami Sonoma County

NAMI Sonoma County's mission is to build better lives for individuals and families affected by mental illness throughout Sonoma County by providing education, support, and advocacy.

—

Contra Costa Crisis Center

The Contra Costa Crisis Center's mission is to keep people in Contra Costa County, California alive and safe, help them through crises, and connect them with culturally relevant resources in the community.

Health

Solano Family & Childrens Council Inc

Solano Family & Children's Services promotes and advocates for the well-being of children, their families, and child care providers by offering access to a variety of child care resources.

Human Services

California Housing Partner Corporation

The California Housing Partnership Corporation creates and preserves affordable and sustainable homes for Californians with low incomes by providing expert financial and policy solutions to nonprofit and public partners.

Unclassified

Solano Community Foundation

The Solano Community Foundation strengthens Solano County by advancing equity, supporting nonprofit resilience, and expanding access to philanthropy. We serve as a community leader, responsive grantmaker, and trusted partner for donors who…

Philanthropy

El Concilio California

Empowering diverse communities in california's central valley.

Human Services

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Healthcare Foundation Northern Sonoma and the most unlike its peers is Desert Valleys Employee Foundation. 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 33 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 9% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/90

the rest of the field

536/5,775

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.

06the grantee network

81 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)

Early backer (in before they grew)

80/81

Grantees still filing

59/81

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Philanthropy$6,328,578Other$5,572,609Human Services$4,532,322Community Improvement$1,996,145Health$1,633,851Food & Nutrition$641,782Arts & Culture$399,176

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.

Sonoma County Community FoundationCA112.4× affinity55 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Sonoma County Community Foundation · Sonoma County Vintners Foundation · McNabb Foundation · United Way of the Wine Country · Marin Community Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Bothin Foundation · Tipping Point Community · Sonoma Valley Vintners & Growers · Community Foundation of Mendocino County · East Bay Community Foundation · The San Francisco 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 REDWOOD CREDIT UNION COMMUNITY FUND 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

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%

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: SONOMA COUNTY HORSE COUNCIL.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

6 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 680400194 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 SONOMA COUNTY HORSE COUNCIL, 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

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 52% 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 Redwood Credit Union Community Fund?

Find your warmest path to Redwood Credit Union Community Fund 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.

REDWOOD CREDIT UNION COMMUNITY FUND

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?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

81 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Redwood Credit Union Community Fund?

More from the funding graph

REDWOOD CREDIT UNION COMMUNITY FUND

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?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

81 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Redwood Credit Union Community Fund?

More from the funding graph