· Private foundation
Sgt Mark Antonowitsch 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 FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k4 grants · $8k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $30k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $54k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ORANGE COUNTY FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER | $54,000 |
| CHOC CHILDRENS FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| GIVING CHILDREN HOPE | $10,000 |
| THE SALVATION ARMY | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,500 |
| FEEDING AMERICA | $1,000 |
| LAW ENFORCEMENT LEGAL DEFENSE FUND | $1,000 |
| INVEST USA | $500 |
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 (FY20–23, $111k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +12% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
19 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 2 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, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
MISSION HOSPITAL REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER3× · 2020–2022 · $628k · revenue +34%- CFCHOC FOUNDATION6× · 2020–2025 · $332k · revenue +20%
- LSLIVING SUCCESS CENTER2× · 2020–2021 · $45k · revenue +80%
Funded once
- HHHOAG HOSPITAL FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $250k · revenue +267%
- LMLINCOLN MEDIA FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue +837%
- ICIMMANUEL CHRISTIAN SCHOOLone grant, 2023 · $50k
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 distribute public affairs and other educational information in order to create an electronic bridge between californians and their public officials, and, in the process educate a new generation of voting citizens and civic leaders who…
The organization provides medical care to improve, maintain, and restore the health of the people in the communities we serve.
To eliminate disparities in health care access and outcomes by providing superior quality health and human services through an integrated world-class delivery system for latino, multi-ethnic underserved communities in southern california.
Chcf is dedicated to advancing meaningful, measurable improvements in the way the health care delivery system provides care to the people of california, particularly those with low incomes and those whose needs are not well served by the…
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 organization provides medical care to improve, maintain, and restore the health of the people in the communities we serve.
The fsmb serves as the voice for state medical boards, supporting them through education, assessment, research and advocacy while providing services and initiatives that promote patient safety, quality health care and regulatory best…
Ahip is the national trade association representing the health insurance industry. ahip's members provide health care coverage, services and solutions to more than 200 million americans. we are committed to market-based solutions and…
To improve, maintain and restore the health of the people in the communities we serve.
Our mission: to improve the quality of health care.our vision: better health care. better choices. better health.
Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…
The california dental association is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Heritage Foundation and the most unlike its peers is House of Hope. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 30 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) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 4% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% 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.
31 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. 31 of the 58 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 MISSION HOSPITAL REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds CHOC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HOAG HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LINCOLN CLUB INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds LINCOLN MEDIA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds LIVING SUCCESS CENTER ↗
- Who funds CATERINAS CLUB ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA POLICY CENTER ↗
- Who funds GIVING CHILDREN HOPE ↗
- Who funds THE OBRIA GROUP INC ↗
- Who funds ADVANCING AMERICAN FREEDOM INC ↗
- Who funds JOHN HENRY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds #WALKAWAY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MARY'S SHELTER ↗
- Who funds Fixn Fidos Inc ↗
- Who funds THE RICHARD NIXON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Noble Friends Foundation for OC Animal Care ↗
- Who funds SADDLEBACK COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HOUSE OF HOPE ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION 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: Orange County Community Foundation · Donors Trust Inc · Bradley Impact Fund Inc · Lindholm Foundation · The Lewis Family Charitable Foundation · Farmers & Merchants Bank Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
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 Sgt Mark Antonowitsch 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.
- Shriners Hospitals for Children — 0% of income from government
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.