Skip to content
Ring-Miscikowski Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Ring-Miscikowski Foundation

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$350k
Granted FY2023
10
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Arts & Culture$5.4MCrime & Legal$1.5MHealth$407kFood & Nutrition$296kAnimals$237kEnvironment$175kPhilanthropy$150kInternational$100kOther$0
02FY2023 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $150k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $200k
$25,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$18k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SFSPCA$50,000
SANTA FE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$50,000
THE MUSIC CENTER$50,000
HEALTHRIGHT 360$50,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN$25,000
KITCHEN ANGELS$25,000
SKIRBALL CULTURAL CENTER$25,000
SANTA FE ANIMAL SHELTER$25,000
NEW MEXICO MUSEUM OF ART FOUNDATION$25,000
THE FOOD DEPOT$25,000
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 (FY21–23, $125k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%THE FOOD DEPOT: $50k → 12%THE FOOD DEPOT: $50k → 12%THE FOOD DEPOT: $25k → 12%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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.0M · 14 repeat orgs$165k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2023, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
3

Total granted

$8.0M
$140k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%
+88%

Still filing today

79%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
Arts & CultureCrime & LegalAnimalsInternationalHuman ServicesOther
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

  • EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY SUPPORT FUND INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $850k · revenue +10%
  • PUBLIC COUNSEL
    5× · 2017–2021 · $650k · revenue +85%
  • HEALTHRIGHT 360
    6× · 2018–2023 · $270k · revenue +45%

Funded once

  • EC
    END CHILD POVERTY IN CALIFORNIA
    one grant, 2017 · $100k
  • FA
    FINE ARTS WORK CENTER IN PROVINCETOWN INC
    one grant, 2018 · $20k · revenue -24%
  • EN
    Equality Now Incgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $20k · revenue +88%
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
The San Francisco Particular Council of the Society of St Vincent De Paul

The mission of the st. vincent de paul society of san francisco (svdp-sf) is to offer hope and service on a direct person-to-person basis, working to break the cycles of homelessness and domestic violence.

Human Services
2
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
3
San Francisco Museum of Modern Art

See schedule osfmoma believes the art of our time is vital and shares it with passion and purpose, and that art and the creative process can open minds and help build a better world. for that reason, we assemble unparalleled collections,…

Arts & Culture
4
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

The aspca's mission, as stated by founder henry bergh in 1866, is "to provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the united states." the aspca was founded on the belief that animals are entitled to kind and…

Animals
5
Humane Society Silicon Valley

At humane society silicon valley, our mission is to save lives, keep families together, and create a better future for pets and their people.(see schedule o for continuation)

Animals
6
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals of Northern Nv

Our mission is to be an innovative regional leader in responsible treatment of homeless dogs and cats, primarily through their rescue and placement in forever loving homes and by promoting spaying and neutering to control pet…

Unclassified
7
Animal Protection New Mexico

To protect animals by creating systemic change resulting in the humane treatment of all animals. we create policies, infrastructure, and services that protect animals and strengthen our communities, and we design and implement humane and…

Animals
8
Second Harvest of Silicon Valley

To realize our vision of a hunger free community we will provide more food, healthy food and better access to food. we will leverage our own resources and also work with partners in the community.

Food & Nutrition
9
Federation for American Immigration Reform

The federation for american immigration reform's (fair) mission is to educate the public about the economic, sociological, environmental, demographic and other effects of mass immigration to the united states.

International
10
Public Health Foundation Enterprises Inc

To enhance the health, wellness, and resilience of every community we serve - see schedule o for more details

—
11
Swords to Plowshares Veterans Rights Organization

Swords to plowshares' mission is to heal the wounds of war, to restore dignity, hope and self-sufficiency to all veterans in need, and to significantly reduce homelessness and poverty among veterans.

Public Benefit
12
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc

Protection of animal rights

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is San Francisco Aids Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Skirball Cultural Center. 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

15 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. 15 of the 19 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/15
Grantees still filing
10/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE MUSIC CENTER: $5,050,000 · OtherTHE MUSIC CENTERNEW MEXICO MUSEUM OF ART FOUNDATION: $275,000 · OtherHEALTHRIGHT 360: $270,000 · Other+6 more: $583,000 · Other+6 moreEVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY SUPPORT FUND INC: $850,000 · Crime & LegalEVERYTOWN FOR GUN SA…PUBLIC COUNSEL: $650,000 · Crime & LegalPUBLIC COUNSELTHE SAN FRANCISCO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $187,000 · AnimalsSANTA FE ANIMAL SHELTER AND HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $50,000 · AnimalsSANTA FE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $150,000 · PhilanthropyTHE FOOD DEPOT: $125,000 · Human ServicesSKIRBALL CULTURAL CENTER: $25,000 · Arts & CultureFINE ARTS WORK CENTER IN PROVINCETOWN INC: $20,000 · Arts & CultureILLUMINATE THE ARTS: $20,000 · Arts & CultureEquality Now Inc: $20,000 · International
Other$6,178,000Crime & Legal$1,500,000Animals$237,000Philanthropy$150,000Human Services$125,000Arts & Culture$65,000International$20,000

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 budgetEVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY SUPPORT FUND INC: $850,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetPUBLIC COUNSEL: $650,000 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetHEALTHRIGHT 360: $270,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetTHE SAN FRANCISCO SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS: $187,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $175,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetSANTA FE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $150,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO FOOD BANK: $136,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE FOOD DEPOT: $125,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetSAN FRANCISCO AIDS FOUNDATION: $87,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetSANTA FE ANIMAL SHELTER AND HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $50,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetKITCHEN ANGELS INC: $35,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetSKIRBALL CULTURAL CENTER: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFINE ARTS WORK CENTER IN PROVINCETOWN INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetEquality Now Inc: $20,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetILLUMINATE THE ARTS: $20,000 over 2y, 1.7% 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.

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.

National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
National Philanthropic TrustPA10.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Ring-Miscikowski Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ring-Miscikowski 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%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 27%
  • Fine Arts Work Center in Provincetown Inc: 27% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
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 Ring-Miscikowski Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Ring-Miscikowski 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 19 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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Ring-Miscikowski’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home