How much did RICHARD AND HARRIET ORKAND CHARITABLE & grant in FY2024?

Health$255kHuman Services$120kEducation$71kInternational$24kCivil Rights$10kCrime & Legal$9kPublic Benefit$8kArts & Culture$7kHousing & Shelter$3kOther$187k

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

2020

religion issuesissues civil

2021

religion issuesissues civil

2022

—

2023

—

2024

—

2025

restoration

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

03FY2024 · 53 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k52 grants · $59k
$10k–50k1 grant · $10k

$1,000

Median grant

States reached

$1.4M

Total assets

Largest grants

VENICE FAMILY CLINIC$10,000
AVEGA AGHOZO$5,000
INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL CORPS$4,000
FRIENDS OF THE LA PHILHARMONIC$3,500
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION$3,000
EVERYCHILD FOUNDATION$2,500
CASA OF LOS ANGELES$2,500
KPCC$2,500
JEWISH WORLD WATCH$2,500
CHILDREN'S INSTITUTE INC$2,000
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF NEVE SHALOM WAH$1,500
WORLD UNION FOR PROGRESSIVE JUDAISM$1,500
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER$1,500
LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS EDUCATION$1,500
BEND THE ARC$1,500

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 (FY18–24, $120k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14% — the area typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-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.

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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$673k · 66 repeat orgs$20k to everyone else

66 repeat relationships — 51 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$673k

$14k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%

+217%

Still filing today

42%

13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

HealthEducationArts & CultureHuman ServicesCivil RightsPublic BenefitOther

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

VENICE FAMILY CLINIC
6× · 2018–2024 · $243k · revenue +98%
TP
THE PEOPLE CONCERN
5× · 2020–2024 · $108k · revenue +319%
PU
PEPPERDINE UNIVERSITY
2× · 2018–2020 · $50k · revenue +36%

Funded once

TI
TEMPLE ISAIAH
one grant, 2018 · $5k
AA
AVEGA AGAHOZO
one grant, 2023 · $5k
L
LAMPOPCC
one grant, 2018 · $2k

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.

National Council of Jewish Women

Inspired by jewish values, the national council of jewish women is a grassroots organization of volunteers and advocates who strive for social justice by improving the quality of life for women, children, and families, and by safeguarding…

Community Improvement

International Aids Vaccine

Translate scientific discoveries into affordable, globally accessible public health solutions

International

Public Counsel

Public counsel is a nonprofit public interest law firm dedicated to (see sch o for continuation)advancing civil rights and racial and economic justice, as well as to amplifying the power of our clients through comprehensive legal advocacy.

Crime & Legal

Jewish Federation Council of Greater La

Based on jewish values, the jewish federation of greater los angeles convenes and leads the community and leverages its resources to assure the continuity of the jewish people, support a secure state of israel, care for jews in need here…

Philanthropy

American Jewish World Service Inc

We work to realize human rights and end poverty in africa, asia, latin america and the caribbean.

International

Inner City Law Center

Fighting for justice and housing by providing legal representation for the homeless and working poor.

Crime & Legal

The American Institute of Architects

The AIA California, in collaboration with local components, is the voice of the architectural profession.

—

Witness Inc

Witness helps people use video and technology to protect and defend human rights. the organization operates globally. witness' global team designs solutions, provides guidance, and co-develops strategies that enable human rights defenders…

International

American Civil Liberties Union

At the aclu of south carolina foundation, we envision a south carolina where "we the people" means all of us. we defend and advance the civil rights and civil liberties of all south carolinians through litigation, education, and advocacy.

Civil Rights

Salus University

Advancing integrated health care through innovative education, research and clinical services

—

California Apartment Association

To represent the ethical members of the rental housing industry within the state of california

—

Women's Foundation of California

Women's foundation of california amplifies the voices and experiences of community leaders, redistributes knowledge, power, and resources, and mobilizes communities and funders to advance justice for all.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The People Concern and the most unlike its peers is The Retina Vitreous Foundation. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 42 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) — 0% 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 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/31

the rest of the field

13%

6,641/49,785

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.

05the grantee network

29 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)

29/29

Grantees still filing

22/29

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Health$255,000Other$204,750Human Services$119,500Education$71,170International$24,000Civil Rights$9,500Crime & Legal$9,000

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.

California Community FoundationCA21.9× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Weingart Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · Jewish Communal Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable 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 organisation RICHARD AND HARRIET ORKAND CHARITABLE & 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 · 0–90%

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: RETINA VITREOUS FOUNDATION.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~295 months of operating runway; revenue contracted over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 208197007 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 RETINA VITREOUS FOUNDATION, 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

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 295 months of cash on hand.
WatchSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 16% of their budget — diversified.
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 Richard and Harriet Orkand Charitable &?

Find your warmest path to Richard and Harriet Orkand Charitable & 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.

RICHARD AND HARRIET ORKAND CHARITABLE &

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?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

29 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Richard and Harriet Orkand Charitable &?

More from the funding graph

RICHARD AND HARRIET ORKAND CHARITABLE &

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?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

29 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Richard and Harriet Orkand Charitable &?

More from the funding graph