· Private foundation
Ronald W Burkle Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| AMED KHAN FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
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 (FY23–24, $200k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 50% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 14% of Ronald W Burkle Foundation’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.
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +63% since the first grant, against +31% for the ones you funded once.
4 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $100k 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
- CHChildren's Hospital Los Angeles2× · 2018–2020 · $200k · revenue +27%
CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER3× · 2017–2019 · $75k · revenue +63%- TATOURETTE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA INC2× · 2019–2021 · $50k · revenue +15%
Funded once
- BOBRING ON THE MUSIC INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $200k · revenue +36%
- SCSilverlake Conserv (Bring on the Music Inc)one grant, 2017 · $200k
- AFAMERICAN FRIENDS OF HEBREW UNIVERSITY INCone grant, 2018 · $100k · revenue +8%
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 Television Academy is dedicated to celebrating excellence, innovation and the advancement of the telecommunications arts and sciences through recognition, education and leadership, while fostering a diverse, inclusive and accessible…
The charitable arm of the tv academy, the academy of television arts & sciences foundation, is dedicated to preserving television while educating and inspiring future leaders.
The mission of the university of california, irvine foundation (uc irvine foundation) is to raise and manage private funds to support uc irvine's broader mission of excellence in teaching, research and public service. to this end, the uc…
The association serves its members by creating resources that enable california school administrators to develop and apply creative leadership and management skills and in turn, improve the educational process for all students.
To harness the power of the human immune system and advanced computing technologies to create and translate scientific discoveries into next generation vaccines and therapies for prevention, control and cure of chronic diseases, enabling…
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.
The jonsson cancer center foundation is the single most important vehicle for raising private funds for cancer research at ucla and plays a key role in advancing cancer treatments and care. please see schedule o for additional information.
Committed to exceptional healthcare quality for all and actively engaged with our community, einstein drives scientific discovery and educates compassionate leaders in health and science.
The Institute is a scientific research center dedicated to conducting basic and applied research to advance the understanding of human disease and the improvement of human health. The Institute fosters an innovative research environment…
Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.
To support the activities and purposes of altamed health services corporation, a california nonprofit public benefit corporation "ahsc", a section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization.
The specific purposes for which bafta na is organized is to promote, maintain, improve and advance original and creative work among individuals employed professionally in film and television production and allied industries, to create and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is After-School All-Stars and the most unlike its peers is Yucaipa Valley Lions Club. 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 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 6% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% 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.
25 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. 25 of the 30 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 UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Los Angeles ↗
- Who funds BRING ON THE MUSIC INC ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRIENDS OF HEBREW UNIVERSITY INC ↗
- Who funds EDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMED KHAN FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PRINCESS GRACE FOUNDATION - USA ↗
- Who funds ROBERT A TOIGO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BORN THIS WAY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds Legal Aid Foundation of Los Angeles ↗
- Who funds TOURETTE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds ALL IT TAKES CO BOSTON BOOKKEEPING SERVICES ↗
- Who funds TRIBECA FILM INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF ROBINSON GARDENS INC ↗
- Who funds MEN HAVING BABIES INC ↗
- Who funds PARENTS OF WATTS WORKING W YOUTH AND ADULTS ↗
- Who funds THE ALLIANCE FOR CLIMATE PROTECTION ↗
- Who funds NAVY SEAL FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds A PLACE CALLED HOME ↗
- Who funds 826LA ↗
- Who funds AFTER-SCHOOL ALL-STARS ↗
- Who funds GINA ROSE MONTALTO MEMORIAL FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BABY2BABY ↗
- Who funds Yucaipa Valley Lions Club ↗
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: Weingart Foundation · The Annenberg Foundation · California Community Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Ronald W Burkle 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.
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.