Skip to content

· Private foundation

Rudd Family Foundation

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.

$123k
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
Largest
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.

Education$3.8MHealth$53kHuman Services$49kInternational$37kYouth Development$25kArts & Culture$2kFood & Nutrition$52Recreation & Sports$50
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k6 grants · $112k
$15,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$7.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Madison Square Boys Girls Club$25,000
Casa De Angeles Foundation$21,000
Individual grant recipient$20,000
American Himalayan Foundation$20,000
Alzheimer Association$15,000
Orinda Woman's Club$11,000
Front Porch Communities Foundation$7,000
Residents' Association Of CBTS$3,000
KQED$500
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, $31k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Casa De Angeles Foundation: $21k → 8%Casa De Angeles Foundation: $5k → 8%Casa De Angeles Foundation: $2k → 8%Casa De Angeles Foundation: $2k → 8%Casa De Angeles Foundation: $1k → 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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.8M · 6 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 2 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
13

Total granted

$2.8M
$1.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+10%
+44%

Still filing today

100%
23%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 43% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $70k 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
InternationalArts & CultureHuman ServicesRecreation & SportsHealthPhilanthropyOther
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

  • CD
    Casa de Angeles Foundation
    5× · 2017–2024 · $31k · revenue +43%
  • OW
    Orinda Womans Club
    6× · 2017–2024 · $15k · revenue +40%
  • KI
    KQED INC
    3× · 2022–2024 · $2k · revenue +10%

Funded once

  • UA
    UMass Amherst FoundationMemorial Ha
    one grant, 2018 · $1.0M
  • BC
    Balinese Children's Educational Fun
    one grant, 2023 · $15k
  • AI
    American Institute for Cancer Resea
    one grant, 2017 · $11k
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
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
2
The International School of San Francisco

Guided by the principles of academic rigor and diversity, the international school of san francisco offers programs of study in french and english to prepare its graduates for a world in which the ability to think critically and to…

Education
3
The Uc Davis Foundation

The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.

Education
4
Uc Riverside Foundation

To support educational, research and public functions and programs of the riverside campus of the university of california.

Education
5
The San Diego Foundation

The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.

Philanthropy
6
Pitzer College

Pitzer College produces engaged socially responsible citizens of the world through an academically rigorous, interdisciplinary liberal arts education emphasizing social justice, intercultural understanding and environmental sensitivity.…

Education
7
United States Association for Unhcr

USA for UNHCR protects and supports refugees by mobilizing resources, elevating awareness, and driving action through a network of engaged supporters.

International
8
Compassion International Incorporated

Compassion exists to release children from poverty in Jesus' name. Compassion serves all children, regardless of religion, race, ethnicity, or gender.

International
9
California Institute for BioMedical Research

Our mission is to build a unique institute that bridges basic research and drug discovery, and that attracts the best and brightest scientists, physicians and students to work together synergistically to find cures for neglected human…

—
10
Foundation for Sustainable Development

The Foundation for Sustainable Development FSD or the Foundation is a nonprofit organization based in Oakland, California, whose mission is to achieve community-driven goals through asset-based development and international exchange in…

—
11
Goodwill of the San Francisco Bay

Goodwill is a 501(c)3 local, nonprofit employment social enterprise that creates life changing opportunities for people in the community through training and the power of work. The people Goodwill trains and places in jobs include people…

Employment
12
Partners of the Americas Foundation

To advance the social economic well being of the americas.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The American Himalayan Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Casa de Angeles Foundation. 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

11 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. 11 of the 24 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FRIENDS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX: $2,732,698 · InternationalFRIENDS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX+3 more: $36,217 · InternationalUMass Amherst FoundationMemorial Ha: $1,000,000 · OtherUMass Amherst FoundationMemorial…+13 more: $117,897 · Other+13 moreCasa de Angeles Foundation: $31,160 · Human ServicesFront Porch Communities Foundation: $7,000 · HealthRESIDENTS ASSOC OF CARLSBAD BY THE SEA: $3,000 · PhilanthropyKQED INC: $1,500 · Arts & CultureBERKELEY REPERTORY THEATRE: $300 · Arts & CultureSPECIAL OLYMPICS INC: $50 · Recreation & Sports
International$2,768,915Other$1,117,897Human Services$31,160Health$7,000Philanthropy$3,000Arts & Culture$1,800Recreation & Sports$50

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFRIENDS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX: $2,732,698 over 6y, 89% of budgetCasa de Angeles Foundation: $31,160 over 5y, 6.3% of budgetThe American Himalayan Foundation: $28,750 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetOrinda Womans Club: $15,325 over 6y, 16% of budgetMEDSHARE INTERNATIONAL INC: $7,367 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetFront Porch Communities Foundation: $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetRESIDENTS ASSOC OF CARLSBAD BY THE SEA: $3,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetKQED INC: $1,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBERKELEY REPERTORY THEATRE: $300 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPLAN INTERNATIONAL USA INC: $100 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS INC: $50 over 1y, 0.0% 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 FRIENDS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX ↗
  • Who funds Casa de Angeles Foundation ↗
  • Who funds The American Himalayan Foundation ↗
  • Who funds Orinda Womans Club ↗
  • Who funds MEDSHARE INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds Front Porch Communities Foundation ↗
  • Who funds RESIDENTS ASSOC OF CARLSBAD BY THE SEA ↗
  • Who funds KQED INC ↗
  • Who funds BERKELEY REPERTORY THEATRE ↗
  • Who funds PLAN INTERNATIONAL USA INC ↗
  • Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS INC ↗

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO6.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Rudd Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rudd Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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.

    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 24 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 Rudd Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph