How much did SCHWEMM FAMILY FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

Environment$197kArts & Culture$159kFood & Nutrition$67kEducation$33kAnimals$26kRecreation & Sports$25kYouth Development$11kHealth$8kCrime & Legal$8kOther$321k

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

creeksantaenhancementhandsfield tripsphasehistory

2019

websitestudyacreinvasivewatershed cleanuppondstudent

2020

food

2021

strong environmentalcolormonitoringwetlandsparkinterpretivelow income

2022

developplantseducationalprotecthabitatstudentsgardens

2023

educationaimed increasepreserveinstallationlittertrailwetlands

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 23 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$7,530

Median grant

States reached

$84k

Total assets

Largest grants

Museum of Ventura County$8,000
Santa Monica Historical Society Inc$8,000
Upwell Turtles$8,000
Elkhorn Slough Foundation$8,000
The San Diego River Park Foundation$8,000
Project Coyote Under Earth Island I$8,000
Albina Cooperative Garden$8,000
Friends of the Chicago River$7,960
The Watershed Research and Training$7,894
Central Sierra Environmental Resour$7,815
La Jolla Historical Society$7,741
American River Parkway Foundation$7,530
Friends of San Pedro$7,000
Wishtoyo Foundation$6,240
Catlow1927org$5,000

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY22–22, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12% — the area typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — 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 5% of SCHWEMM FAMILY 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.

SCHWEMM FAMILY FOUNDATIONlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 5.1% directed abroad (not shown)

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.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

36%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$311k · 21 repeat orgs$544k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +78% since the first grant, against +36% for the ones you funded once.

21 repeat relationships — 4 still active in FY2024, 17 since wound down; 19 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$311k

$423k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+78%

+36%

Still filing today

90%

53%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 17% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $120k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EnvironmentArts & CultureEducationFood & NutritionAnimalsRecreation & SportsOther

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

EU
ECO URBAN GARDENS
3× · 2021–2023 · $24k · revenue +152%
CN
California Native Plant Society
3× · 2017–2022 · $24k · revenue +78%
Earth Island Institute Inc
2× · 2017–2022 · $19k · revenue +143%

Funded once

MS
MARIN SHAKESPEARE COMPANY
one grant, 2023 · $15k · revenue -22%
AD
ALIGHT DONOR SERVICES
one grant, 2022 · $15k
AN
A NEW WAY OF LIFE REENTRY PROJECTgraduated
one grant, 2020 · $8k · revenue +79%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council

The Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council is a local nonprofit organization that strives to enhance and restore habitat for fish and wildlife our community and for future generations. Our Board of Directors consists of seven members with…

Environment

Oregon Agricultural Trust

Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.

Environment

Sierra Foothill Conservancy

Protect, manage and preserve lands and wildlife having unique natural resources and cultural qualities within and near the foothills of the sierra nevada range.

Environment

Southern Oregon Land Conservancy Inc

To conserve and enhance land in southern oregon to sustain our human and natural communities forever

Environment

Siskiyou Land Conservancy

The Siskiyou Land Conservancy is a state and federally approved non-profit organization that assists landowners who want to protect the natural values of their land, either through purchase or establishment of conservation easements.

Environment

Oregon Natural Resources Council Fund

Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregons wildlands wildlife and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations

Environment

Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildands defends and restores cascadia's wild ecosystems in the forests, in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…

Environment

Redwood Coast Land Conservancy

We conserve lands for recreational, educational, ecological, agricultural, scenic and open space opportunities. We also develop and maintain public access ways and trails to the ocean, rivers and other natural or scenic features along…

Environment

Pacific Rivers

environmental research, advocacy and education

Environment

Oregon Society of American Foresters

The Oregon Society of American Foresters has 708members in twelve professional chapters and three student chapters throughout Oregon. The Oregon Society of American Foresters is the largest state affiliate of the National Society of…

—

CalWild

CalWild protects our state's drinking water and wild places by seeking new protections for streams and natural areas on public lands. Current campaigns include: the Sierra Forests, NW CA, the Desert, the San Gabriel Mts and the Central…

—

Klamath-Siskiyou Wildlands Center

KS Wilds mission is to protect and restore wild nature in the Klamath-Siskiyou region of southwest Oregon and northwest California.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Restore Oregon Inc and the most unlike its peers is Gresham Historical Society. 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 26 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/72

the rest of the field

12%

12,849/107,443

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.

06the grantee network

70 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

67/70

Grantees still filing

50/70

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$347,534Environment$197,331Arts & Culture$159,442Food & Nutrition$66,830Education$32,604Animals$26,487Recreation & Sports$24,500

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.

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.

PatagoniaorgCA37.5× affinity18 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · The Oregon Community Foundation · The Autzen Foundation · The Reser Family Foundation · The Roundhouse Foundation · The Ford Family Foundation · Juan Young Trust · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · Resources Legacy Fund · Clif Family Foundation · Marin Community 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 organisation SCHWEMM FAMILY 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

11get no government money at all

1rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: ST PAUL MISSION HISTORICAL SOCIETY.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 930671244 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on ST PAUL MISSION HISTORICAL SOCIETY, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue contracted over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 37% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Schwemm Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Schwemm Family Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

SCHWEMM FAMILY FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

70 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Schwemm Family Foundation?

More from the funding graph

SCHWEMM FAMILY FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

70 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Schwemm Family Foundation?

More from the funding graph