· Private foundation
Robert & Maureen Lucas Family Foundation
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k16 grants · $24k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $40k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DOOR OF HOPE | $10,000 |
| DOOR OF HOPE | $10,000 |
| LA CANADA PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH | $10,000 |
| PATH | $10,000 |
| BRIDGES | $5,000 |
| LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION | $3,000 |
| BRIDGES | $2,700 |
| AAPI WOMEN LEAD | $2,500 |
| LA CANADA PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH | $2,500 |
| VIBRA VOCE | $1,500 |
| IMMIGRANT DEFENDERS LAW CENTER | $1,500 |
| KCRW | $600 |
| Individual grant recipient | $600 |
| PBS SOCAL | $600 |
| KKJZ | $600 |
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 (FY17–25, $104k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
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.
19 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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 FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
- DODOOR OF HOPE7× · 2017–2025 · $133k · revenue +369%
THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC6× · 2017–2024 · $112k · revenue +69%- PPATH7× · 2017–2025 · $85k · revenue +361%
Funded once
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATEDgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +202%
TREVOR PROJECT INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +318%
THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCHone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue 0%
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.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The ucla foundation is the giving, receiving, and investing arm of the ucla campus. the foundation enables private donors to help build, sustain and advance one of the world's finest academic and research institutions. private philanthropy…
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,…
To distribute public affairs and other educational information in order to create an electronic bridge between californians and their public officials, and, in the process educate a new generation of voting citizens and civic leaders who…
The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.
To provide multi-specialty surgical care, humanitarian aid and educational support to people in low- and middle-income countries.
The california immigrant policy center upholds the humanity of immigrant communities in california by transforming systems to achieve racial, social, and economic justice.
The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.
A nonprofit scientific research organization that develops vaccines and antibodies for hiv, tuberculosis, and emerging infectious diseases.
Central indiana corporate partnership (cicp) is an alliance of indiana's business and research university leaders coming together to foster long-term prosperity for the region. cicp's mission is to transform the economy of indiana in order…
Our institutional mission is to educate and prepare students to be ethical leaders and socially responsible global citizens who incorporate the dominican values of study, reflection, community and service into their lives.
The foundation's mission is to improve the oral health of all californians by supporting the dental profession and its efforts to meet community needs.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Immigration Law Center and the most unlike its peers is Aapi Women Lead. 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 34 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
34 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. 34 of the 46 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 DOOR OF HOPE ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds PATH ↗
- Who funds THE BAIL PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER ↗
- Who funds GROWING PAINS COMPASSION OUTREACH ↗
- Who funds LA CANADA FLINTRIDGE EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WORLD VISION INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds TREVOR PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds THE MICHAEL J FOX FOUNDATION FOR PARKINSON'S RESEARCH ↗
- Who funds UNION RESCUE MISSION ↗
- Who funds Friends of the Congo ↗
- Who funds MUSIC CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CHELSEA JEWISH LIFECARE INC ↗
- Who funds PALESTINE CHILDREN'S RELIEF FUND ↗
- Who funds PROJECT WEBERRENEW ↗
- Who funds AAPI Women Lead ↗
- Who funds Friends of Forman Christian College Inc ↗
- Who funds PASADENA SENIOR CENTER ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL FUNDERS FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds The Wayward Artist Inc ↗
- Who funds Immigrant Defenders Law Center ↗
- Who funds Flintridge Center ↗
- Who funds ARTS AND SERVICES FOR DISABLED INC DBA ABLE ARTS WORK ↗
- Who funds COLLEGE ACCESS PLAN ↗
- Who funds THE SANTA MONICA COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RADIO ↗
- Who funds COACHELLA VALLEY RESCUE MISSION ↗
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: California Community Foundation · Sempra Foundation · Pasadena Community Foundation · Ann Peppers Foundation · S Mark Taper Foundation · The Rose Hills Foundation · The Ahmanson Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · The Annenberg Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program
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 Robert & Maureen Lucas Family 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.
- Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc — 7% of income from government
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.