· Private foundation
Smith-Welsh 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 clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k32 grants · $143k
- $10k–50k14 grants · $195k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SOUTH COAST BOTANIC GARDEN | $50,000 |
| WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST | $25,000 |
| NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM | $25,000 |
| WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY | $25,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,000 |
| SUN VALLEY MUSIC FESTIVAL | $15,000 |
| CATALINA ISLAND MUSEUM | $10,000 |
| HEALTH FREEDOM DEFENSE FUND | $10,000 |
| IDAHO WILDLIFE FEDERATION | $10,000 |
| CABRILLO AQUARIUMMUSEUM | $10,000 |
| CALIFORNIA TROUT | $10,000 |
| NATIVE FISH SOCIETY | $10,000 |
| TROUT UNLIMITED | $10,000 |
| BACKCOUNTRY HUNTERS & ANGLERS | $10,000 |
| CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF LA | $10,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $55k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 46% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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 +26% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
63 repeat relationships — 41 still active in FY2025, 22 since wound down; 6 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, 88% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $45k 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
- SCSOUTH COAST BOTANIC GARDEN FOUNDATION INC9× · 2017–2025 · $267k · revenue +160%
- SVSUN VALLEY SUMMER SYMPHONY INC6× · 2017–2025 · $77k · revenue +7%
- CICatalina Island Museum9× · 2017–2025 · $76k · revenue +112%
Funded once
- THTHE HOUSE INSTITUTE FOUNDATIONone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue -4%
- PCPENINSULA COMMITTEE CHILDREN'S HOSPITALone grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +12%
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $3k
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.
Icl's mission is to create a conservation community and pragmatic, enduring solutions that protect and restore the air you breathe, the water you drink, and the land and wildlife you love.
To improve fisheries resources in the state of california.
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
The catalina island conservancy protects and stewards 88% of catalina island. more than 42,000 acres of wildlands, coves and coastal habitats. founded to preserve the island's natural resources, the conservancy advances a mission rooted in…
To conserve functioning salmon/steelhead eco-system at watershed levels, integrate angling activities with basic scientific research, collect raw data, monitor environmental functions, salmon/steelhead population dynamics, public…
To mobilize people in local communities around the world to protect marine wildlife and the oceans and inland watersheds that sustain them.
Our mission is to restore wild salmon and steelhead & support sustainable fishing in the pacific northwest.
The organization protects and enhances the local environment through education, advocacy and legal action.
Save the redwoods league protects and restores redwood forests and connects people with their peace and beauty so these wonders of the natural world flourish.
The foundation board is comprised of members with diverse backgrounds and expertise who devote their shared commitment and passion to collectively support protection and restoration of the washington coast region salmon by providing…
Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…
Krrc's mission is to implement the klamath hydroelectric settlement agreement by removing four hydroelectric dams on the klamath river, restoring surrounding lands, and implementing required mitigation measures. (continued on schedule o)as…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Toberman Neighborhood Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Idaho Wildlife Federation. 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 40 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
45 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. 45 of the 78 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 SOUTH COAST BOTANIC GARDEN FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds THE NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM SANTA MARIA CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds SUN VALLEY SUMMER SYMPHONY INC ↗
- Who funds Catalina Island Museum ↗
- Who funds Native Fish Society Inc ↗
- Who funds Ducks Unlimited Inc ↗
- Who funds CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY ↗
- Who funds LUNDQUIST INSTITUTE FOR BIOMEDICAL INNOVATION AT HARBOR-UCLA MEDICAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds Palos Verdes Art Center Beverly G Alpay Center for Arts Education ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF CABRILLO AQUARIUM ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES SAILING FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Blind Childrens Center Inc ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Los Angeles ↗
- Who funds Beacon House ↗
- Who funds TROUT UNLIMITED INC ↗
- Who funds LONG BEACH RESCUE MISSION ↗
- Who funds COAST GUARD FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds BLAINE COUNTY SENIORS COUNCIL INC THE SENIOR CONNECTION ↗
- Who funds PENINSULA LIBRARY FRIENDS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds IDAHO RIVERS UNITED ↗
- Who funds DESCHUTES RIVER ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Los Angeles Maritime Institute ↗
- Who funds WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA TROUT 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: California Community Foundation · The Kenneth T and Eileen L Norris Foundation · The Ahmanson Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Marcil Family Foundation · Oarsmen Foundation · Julie and Ray Craemer Family Foundation · The Green Foundation · Farmers & Merchants Bank Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · Orange County Community Foundation · The Fred and Peggy Hartley Family 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 Smith-Welsh 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.
- Native Fish Society Inc — 27% of income from government
- Western Rivers Conservancy — 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Smith-Welsh Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Smith-Welsh 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.