Skip to content
Ronald & Ann Williams Charitable Foundat at a glance

· Private foundation

Ronald & Ann Williams Charitable Foundat

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$8.8M
Granted FY2024still arriving
60
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$600k
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 2024.

Health$11MHuman Services$7.1MHousing & Shelter$4.9MFood & Nutrition$3.7MEducation$3.5MYouth Development$915kRecreation & Sports$315kEmployment$130kOther$0
02FY2024 · 60 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k5 grants · $145k
  • $50k–250k40 grants · $4.7M
  • $250k+15 grants · $4.8M
$150,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$86M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UCSF FOUNDATION$600,000
SAMARITAN HOUSE$350,000
SAMARITAN HOUSE$345,000
MULTIPLE MYLOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION$300,000
MULTIPLE MYLOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION$300,000
SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK$300,000
FAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING$300,000
COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY$300,000
UCSF SCHOOL OF NURSING$300,000
ECUMENICAL HUNGER PROGRAM$300,000
FAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING$295,000
COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY$295,000
ECUMENICAL HUNGER PROGRAM$295,000
SECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK$295,000
BUILD$265,000
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 (FY17–24, $6.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%AVENIDAS: $210k → 8%AVENIDAS: $175k → 8%AVENIDAS: $175k → 8%AVENIDAS: $175k → 8%AVENIDAS: $175k → 8%MISSION HOSPICE AND HOME CARE: $155k → 7%MISSION HOSPICE AND HOME CARE: $100k → 7%AVENIDAS: $150k → 8%MISSION HOSPICE AND HOME CARE: $100k → 7%MISSION HOSPICE AND HOME CARE: $100k → 7%MISSION HOSPICE AND HOME CARE: $100k → 7%MISSION HOSPICE AND HOME CARE: $100k → 7%MISSION HOSPICE AND HOME CARE: $50k → 7%MISSION HOSPICE AND HOME CARE: $25k → 7%AVENIDAS: $120k → 8%AVENIDAS: $100k → 8%FAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING: $300k → 8%FAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING: $300k → 8%FAMILY SUPPORT HOUSING: $300k → 8%FAMILY SUPPORT HOUSING: $300k → 8%FAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING: $295k → 8%FAMILY SUPPORT HOUSING: $250k → 8%FAMILY SUPPORT HOUSING: $200k → 8%FAMILY SUPPORT HOUSING: $195k → 8%COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY: $300k → 8%COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY: $300k → 8%COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY: $300k → 8%COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY: $300k → 8%COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY: $295k → 8%COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY: $250k → 8%COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY: $200k → 8%COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY: $195k → 8%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$30M · 33 repeat orgs$1.3M to everyone else

33 repeat relationships: 28 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

33
2

Total granted

$30M
$250k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+11%
+17%

Still filing today

67%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.0M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesFood & NutritionEducationCommunity ImprovementRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • SAMARITAN HOUSE
    7× · 2017–2024 · $2.5M · revenue +249%
  • CS
    COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW LOS ALTOS AND LOS ALTOS HILLS INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $2.1M · revenue +131%
  • FS
    FAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $2.1M · revenue +45%

Funded once

  • AD
    ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC
    one grant, 2022 · $200k · revenue -9%
  • JF
    JEWISH FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES EAST BAY
    one grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue +17%
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
Sutter Bay Hospitals

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
2
Sutter Bay Medical Foundation

Mission statement: mission: caring for our patients first and our people always. vision: to be the most comprehensive, integrated and connected health system for getting and staying well. values: excellence - we deliver high-quality,…

Health
3
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
4
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
5
Union Station Homeless Services

We work to end homelessness through housing solutions, supportive services, and connection to community. we advocate for equitable and just systems that ensure all individuals and families will have a safe place they can call home.

Human Services
6
Institute On Aging

See schedule othe mission of the institute on aging is to enhance the quality of life for adults as they age by enabling them to maintain their health, well being, independence and participation in the community. ioa fulfills this mission…

Human Services
7
Enterprise for Youth

Enterprise for youth empowers under-resourced san francisco youths to reach their potential through transformative paid internship experiences supported by a community of employers, caring adults, and peers.

Youth Development
8
San Francisco Food Bank

To end hunger in san francisco and marin counties by soliciting food donations nationally, distributing this food to qualifying public service agencies and neighborhood pantries, advocating for improved government food programs, and…

—
9
Family Caregiver Alliance

To support and assist caregivers of adults with chronic diseases and conditions through education, services, research and advocacy.

Health
10
San Francisco Challenge dba AmericaOne
Recreation & Sports
11
Interim Inc

Interim, inc.'s mission is to provide services and affordable housing to supporting members of our community with mental illness in building productive and satisfying lives.

—
12
Sacramento Children's Home

At the sacramento children's home, we are committed to opening doors to the future by maximizing the potential of children and families.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jewish Family and Community Services East Bay; the most unlike its peers is Jeremiahs Promise. 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

27 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. 27 of the 43 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.

4
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
26/27
Grantees still filing
15/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SAMARITAN HOUSE: $2,545,000 · OtherSAMARITAN HOUSESECOND HARVEST FOOD BANK: $2,140,000 · OtherSECOND HARVEST FOOD BANKUCSF SCHOOL OF NURSING: $2,000,000 · OtherUCSF SCHOOL OF NURSINGPATHWAYS HOSPICE FOUNDATION: $1,435,000 · OtherPATHWAYS HOSPICE FOUNDATIONKARA: $1,050,000 · OtherKARAALZHEIMERS ASSOC OF N CAL NEV: $910,000 · OtherALZHEIMERS ASSOC OF N CAL NEVSTANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER: $820,000 · OtherSTANFORD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTERCRISTO REY HIGH SCHOOL: $525,000 · Other+15 more: $3,745,000 · Other+15 moreCOMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW LOS ALTOS AND LOS ALTOS HILLS INC: $2,140,000 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY SERVICES AGE…FAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING INC: $2,140,000 · Human ServicesFAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUS…AVENIDAS: $1,280,000 · Human ServicesAVENIDASMISSION HOSPICE & HOME CARE INC: $730,000 · Human ServicesMISSION HOSPICE & HOME…THE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $1,830,000 · HealthTHE MULTIPL…JW HOUSE: $530,000 · HealthJW HOUSETHE HEALTH TRUST: $355,000 · HealthTHE HEALTH …ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $200,000 · HealthALZHEIMER'S…ADOLESCENT COUNSELING SERVICES: $140,000 · Health+1 more: $50,000 · HealthECUMENICAL HUNGER PROGRAM: $2,140,000 · Food & NutritionECUMENICA…Peninsula Food Runners Inc: $330,000 · Food & NutritionPeninsula…LOAVES & FISHES FAMILY KITCHEN: $300,000 · Food & NutritionLOAVES & …UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $1,920,000 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $209,000 · EducationLearning Home Volunteers: $185,000 · EducationEASTSIDE COLLEGE PREPARATORY SCHOOL INC: $165,000 · EducationBUSINESSES UNITED IN INVESTING LENDING & DEVELOPMENT: $915,000 · Community ImprovementSILICON VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $385,000 · Community ImprovementJeremiahs Promise: $315,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$15,170,000Human Services$6,290,000Health$3,105,000Food & Nutrition$2,770,000Education$2,479,000Community Improvement$1,300,000Recreation & Sports$315,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSAMARITAN HOUSE: $2,545,000 over 7y, 2.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW LOS ALTOS AND LOS ALTOS HILLS INC: $2,140,000 over 7y, 6.5% of budgetFAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING INC: $2,140,000 over 7y, 23% of budgetECUMENICAL HUNGER PROGRAM: $2,140,000 over 7y, 7.5% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $1,920,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetTHE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC: $1,830,000 over 7y, 2.1% of budgetAVENIDAS: $1,280,000 over 7y, 5.9% of budgetKARA: $1,050,000 over 7y, 15% of budgetBUSINESSES UNITED IN INVESTING LENDING & DEVELOPMENT: $915,000 over 7y, 6.2% of budgetMISSION HOSPICE & HOME CARE INC: $730,000 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetJW HOUSE: $530,000 over 5y, 28% of budgetLIFEMOVES: $490,000 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetSILICON VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $385,000 over 5y, 2.6% of budgetHOMEFIRST SERVICES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY: $380,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetLOAVES AND FISHES: $365,000 over 5y, 32% of budgetTHE HEALTH TRUST: $355,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetPeninsula Food Runners Inc: $330,000 over 4y, 8.2% of budgetJeremiahs Promise: $315,000 over 5y, 51% of budgetLOAVES & FISHES FAMILY KITCHEN: $300,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $209,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $200,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLearning Home Volunteers: $185,000 over 1y, 41% of budgetEASTSIDE COLLEGE PREPARATORY SCHOOL INC: $165,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetADOLESCENT COUNSELING SERVICES: $140,000 over 4y, 4.4% of budgetDAY WORKER CENTER OF MOUNTAIN VIEW: $130,000 over 4y, 7.0% of budgetALEARN: $55,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES EAST BAY: $50,000 over 1y, 0.4% 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.

  • Who funds SAMARITAN HOUSE ↗
  • Who funds COMMUNITY SERVICES AGENCY OF MOUNTAIN VIEW LOS ALTOS AND LOS ALTOS HILLS INC ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY SUPPORTIVE HOUSING INC ↗
  • Who funds ECUMENICAL HUNGER PROGRAM ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE MULTIPLE MYELOMA RESEARCH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds AVENIDAS ↗
  • Who funds KARA ↗
  • Who funds BUSINESSES UNITED IN INVESTING LENDING & DEVELOPMENT ↗
  • Who funds MISSION HOSPICE & HOME CARE INC ↗
  • Who funds JW HOUSE ↗
  • Who funds LIFEMOVES ↗
  • Who funds SILICON VALLEY EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds HOMEFIRST SERVICES OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds LOAVES AND FISHES ↗
  • Who funds THE HEALTH TRUST ↗
  • Who funds Peninsula Food Runners Inc ↗
  • Who funds Jeremiahs Promise ↗
  • Who funds LOAVES & FISHES FAMILY KITCHEN ↗
  • Who funds THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Learning Home Volunteers ↗
  • Who funds EASTSIDE COLLEGE PREPARATORY SCHOOL INC ↗
  • Who funds ADOLESCENT COUNSELING SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds DAY WORKER CENTER OF MOUNTAIN VIEW ↗

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.

Silicon Valley Commun…Gordon E and Betty I …The David and Lucile …Bright Funds Foundati…Jewish Community Fede…Los Altos Mountain Vi…San Jose Mercury News…Second Harvest of Sil…Sunlight GivingThe Sobrato Family Fo…Kaiser Foundation Hos…Star One Credit Union
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA32× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Bright Funds Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation · San Jose Mercury News Wish Book Fund Inc · Second Harvest of Silicon Valley · Sunlight Giving · The Sobrato Family Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Star One Credit Union

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 Ronald & Ann Williams Charitable Foundat funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ronald & Ann Williams Charitable Foundat. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    12report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 Ronald & Ann Williams Charitable Foundat?

    Find your warmest path to Ronald & Ann Williams Charitable Foundat 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 43 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Ronald & Ann Williams Charitable Foundat’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