Skip to content
Rudolph L Glasel Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

Rudolph L Glasel Charitable Trust

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.

$2k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$395
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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$8kReligion$5kAnimals$3kPhilanthropy$2kHousing & Shelter$1kPublic Benefit$1kHuman Services$770Environment$550Other$0
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$200
Median grant
2
States reached
$42k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
OUR LADY OF THE ROSARY CHURCH$395
TEA3 FOUNDATION$300
HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO$300
ST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE$200
SAN DIEGO CENTER FOR THE BLIND$200
AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION$200
AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY$200
VETERANS OF FOREIGN WAR$200
JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$200
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION$200
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $500 → 10%CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $300 → 11%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $300 → 14%CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $300 → 11%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $250 → 14%CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $300 → 11%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $250 → 14%CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $300 → 11%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $250 → 14%CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $275 → 11%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $250 → 14%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $500 → 11%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $200 → 14%CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $275 → 11%AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION: $200 → 14%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $500 → 11%UNITED JEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN DIE: $200 → 11%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $500 → 11%UNITED JEWISH FEDERATION OF SAN DIE: $200 → 11%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $300 → 11%CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $200 → 11%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $200 → 11%CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $200 → 11%AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $200 → 11%ST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE: $200 → 11%ST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE: $200 → 11%ST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE: $200 → 11%ST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE: $200 → 11%TEA3 FOUNDATION: $300 → 11%JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $300 → 11%SACRED HEART CHURCH: $320 → 11%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $460 → 11%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $400 → 11%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $400 → 11%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $300 → 11%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $300 → 11%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $285 → 11%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $279 → 11%HUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $275 → 11%OUR LADY OF THE ROSARY CHURCH: $525 → 11%OUR LADY OF THE ROSARY CHURCH: $519 → 11%OUR LADY OF THE ROSARY CHURCH: $515 → 11%OUR LADY OF THE ROSARY CHURCH: $435 → 11%OUR LADY OF THE ROSARY CHURCH: $395 → 11%OUR LADY OF THE ROSARY CHURCH: $330 → 11%YMCA: $300 → 11%OUR LADY OF THE ROSARY CHURCH: $300 → 11%OUR LADY OF THE ROSARY CHURCH: $290 → 11%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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$20k · 14 repeat orgs$648 to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +27% since the first grant, against -41% for those funded once.

14 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
8

Total granted

$20k
$348

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%
-41%

Still filing today

36%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $300 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
HealthReligionRecreation & SportsEnvironmentOther
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

  • AH
    American Heart Association Inc
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2k · revenue +33%
  • SD
    SAN DIEGO CENTER FOR THE BLIND
    7× · 2017–2024 · $1k · revenue +24%
  • ST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE INC
    7× · 2017–2024 · $1k · revenue +124%

Funded once

  • MV
    MISSION VALLEY YMCA SWIM TEAM
    one grant, 2017 · $100
  • AA
    ALZHEIMERS ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2017 · $75
  • MARCH OF DIMES INC
    one grant, 2017 · $50 · revenue -41%
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
04the grantee network

7 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. 7 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

OUR LADY OF THE ROSARY CHURCH: $3,309 · OtherOUR LADY OF THE ROSARY CHURCHHUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO: $2,699 · OtherHUMANE SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGOAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: $2,230 · OtherAMERICAN CANCER SOCIETYCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $2,150 · OtherCHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATIONSAN DIEGO CENTER FOR THE BLIND: $1,400 · OtherSAN DIEGO CENTER FOR THE BLINDSACRED HEART CHURCH: $1,320 · OtherSACRED HEART CHURCHVETERANS OF FOREIGN WAR: $1,300 · OtherVETERANS OF FOREIGN WARTHE JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,100 · OtherTHE JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION+11 more: $1,598 · Other+11 moreAmerican Heart Association Inc: $1,850 · HealthAmerican H…+1 more: $50 · HealthST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE INC: $1,350 · ReligionTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $550 · EnvironmentCALIFORNIA STATE PARKS FOUNDATION: $356 · Recreation & Sports
Other$17,106Health$1,900Religion$1,350Environment$550Recreation & Sports$356

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 budgetAmerican Heart Association Inc: $1,850 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetSAN DIEGO CENTER FOR THE BLIND: $1,400 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE INC: $1,350 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetTHE JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,100 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $550 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA STATE PARKS FOUNDATION: $356 over 5y, 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 American Heart Association Inc ↗
  • Who funds SAN DIEGO CENTER FOR THE BLIND ↗
  • Who funds ST VINCENT DE PAUL VILLAGE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA STATE PARKS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MARCH OF DIMES INC ↗

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Rudolph L Glasel Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rudolph L Glasel Charitable Trust. 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%4%8%11%15%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 · 0–15%
    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 Rudolph L Glasel’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