· Private foundation
Sky View 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $382k
- $250k+2 grants · $1.1M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EMIGRANT TRAILS GREENWAY TRUST VIA FIDELITY CHARITABLE | $900,000 |
| PLACER COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $250,000 |
| CALIFORNIA SPORTFISHING PROTECTION ALLIANCE | $160,000 |
| NORTHERN SIERRA PARTNERSHIPCOMMUNITY INITIATIVES | $150,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $72,363 |
| FIDELITY GIFT TRUST | $25,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 67% of your 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 13% of Sky View 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.
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.
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.
6 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 12% 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
- PLPLACER LAND TRUST6× · 2017–2023 · $1.8M · revenue ×17
- TDTRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST2× · 2018–2019 · $500k · revenue +6%
- PNPLACER NATURE CENTER2× · 2017–2019 · $1k · revenue +72%
Funded once
- MAMountain Area Preservation Foundationone grant, 2021 · $250k · revenue -30% · 30% of their budget
- HIHAWAIIAN ISLANDS LAND TRUSTone grant, 2019 · $250k · revenue 0%
- COCOUNTY OF PLACERone grant, 2023 · $100k
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.
Our mission is to work with landowners and communities to conserve the lands we love, now and forever, and to enrich connections to the natural world.
At Yosemite Rivers Alliance, we unite conservation and community to protect and restore the three rivers that ?ow through the Yosemite Regionthe Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and Merced.
The Santa Clara River Conservancy represents the diverse interests of the Santa Clara River, from the flood plain to the highest tributaries, and seeks to secure, sustain, and manage significant lands and waters that provide habitat for…
Nature collective's mission is to drive a passion for nature for all. we think inclusively and diversely when serving those devoid of nature those who remember nature and want to connect back to it and those who have an affinity with…
Protect, manage and preserve lands and wildlife having unique natural resources and cultural qualities within and near the foothills of the sierra nevada range.
The Planning and Conservaton League is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization that serves as the lobbying arm of environmental community -- passing, enforcing, and protecting laws and initiatives that safeguard our environment and communities.
To ensure coast redwood forests in the santa cruz mountains thrive for generations to come. since 1900, sempervirens has protected more than 36,000 acres. learn more about our mission, vision, and strategic plan through 2030 at:…
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.
CSERC protects water, wildlife, and wild places of the Northern Yosemite region.
Mission statement: the league to save lake tahoe protects and restores the environmental health, sustainability, and scenic beauty of the lake tahoe basin. we focus on water quality and its clarity for the preservation of a pristine lake…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Placer Land Trust and the most unlike its peers is The Marguerite Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
13 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. 13 of the 25 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 PLACER LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds TRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds Placer Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds Mountain Area Preservation Foundation ↗
- Who funds HAWAIIAN ISLANDS LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds California Sportfishing Protection Allia ↗
- Who funds THE MARGUERITE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE SAN JUAN PRESERVATION TRUST ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds Sierra Business Council ↗
- Who funds PLACER NATURE CENTER ↗
- Who funds Boys and Girls Club of Placer County ↗
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: Sacramento Region Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 Sky View 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 Sky View Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Sky View 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.