· Private foundation
Schiller 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 FY2021–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k13 grants · $65k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $32k
- $250k+1 grant · $1.1M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Lake Tahoe Community College EconomicBusiness Scholarships | $1,050,000 |
| Phoenix Food Pantry | $12,000 |
| Hope Medical Clinic | $10,000 |
| Sonoma Valley Mentoring Alliance | $10,000 |
| Austin Kirby Foundation | $8,000 |
| Greater Richmond Interfaith Program (GRIP) | $8,000 |
| Manhattan Beach Education Foundation | $7,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $6,000 |
| Friends in Service Here (FISH) | $6,000 |
| Tahoe Valley Elementary School | $5,000 |
| Christmas Cheer | $5,000 |
| Family Tree | $5,000 |
| St Theresa's Church | $4,000 |
| Salvation Army | $3,000 |
| Live Violence Free | $3,000 |
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 (FY21–25, $55k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 68% 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.
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.
21 repeat relationships — 13 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 4 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, 7% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M 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
- SVSonoma Valley Mentoring Alliance2× · 2024–2025 · $18k · revenue +110%
- FTFAMILY TREE INC3× · 2023–2025 · $18k · revenue +4%
- MBMANHATTAN BEACH EDUCATION FOUNDATION3× · 2023–2025 · $17k · revenue +9%
Funded once
- LTLake Tahoe Community College EconomicBusiness Scholarhsipsone grant, 2024 · $50k
- ANAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branchesone grant, 2023 · $11k · revenue +22%
- SAST ANTHONY FOUNDATIONone grant, 2023 · $11k
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.
To support healthy violence-free lives and relationships for all children and adults in the San Luis Valley by providing crisis intervention services advocacy and counseling for victims and survivors of domestic and sexual violence.
The organizations mission is to alleviate food insecurity by providing supplemental food assistance to individuals and families in need. The organization receives monetary contributions used to purchase food and accepts donated food from…
A community where no one should feel the hurt of hunger. Interfaith Food Ministry feeds the hungry and works to reduce food insecurity in Nevada County. We help to sustain health, human dignity and the opportunity for individuals to…
The Organization provides shelter, meals, clothing and counseling for victims of domestic violence, housing crisis, and/or poverty.
Provide services to victims and potential victims of child abuse and neglect.
Provide a caring, advocating, safe, and educationally based environment for survivors of domestic violence and sexual assault.
The organization supports Nevada local CASA programs which recruit, train, retain and deploy volunteers to advocate for abused or neglected children.
Food pantry distribution program provided supportive services to more than 35,000 food insecure individuals and families in Clark County Nevada. Families served 23,839 and individuals 11.161 in the state of Nevada.
Ronald McDonald House Charities of Western Washington & Alaska supports families with seriously ill children by providing a caring home-away-from-home at the SEattle Ronald McDonald House and operating a house and a van service in…
Address the homeless crisis in California.
La Casa de las Madres' mission is to respond to calls for help from DV victims, of all ages, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. We give survivors the tools to transform their lives. We seek to prevent future violence by educating the…
CASA (Court Appointed Special Advocates)El Dorado provides advocacy services to abused and neglected children in the Child Welfare System in El Dorado County, California.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Vista Rise Collective and the most unlike its peers is Austin Kirby Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
17 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. 17 of the 36 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 CHRISTMAS CHEER INC ↗
- Who funds Sonoma Valley Mentoring Alliance ↗
- Who funds FAMILY TREE INC ↗
- Who funds MANHATTAN BEACH EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HOPE MEDICAL CLINIC INC ↗
- Who funds Austin Kirby Foundation ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds GREATER RICHMOND INTERFAITH PROGRAM GRIP ↗
- Who funds VISTA RISE COLLECTIVE ↗
- Who funds Food Bank of Northern Nevada Inc ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S DEMOCRACY CENTER ↗
- Who funds Barton Memorial Hospital Foundation ↗
- Who funds Austin's House ↗
- Who funds CHRISTIAN SCHOOL ASSOCIATION OF ANN ARBOR ↗
- Who funds Casa De Paz ↗
- Who funds TAHOE MAGIC INC ↗
- Who funds South Tahoe National Little League INC ↗
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: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 Schiller 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Schiller Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Schiller Foundation 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.