· Private foundation
Sullivan 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $9,000 |
| Partners in Care Foundation | $7,500 |
| Tunnel to Towers | $2,375 |
| Fetching Retrievers Rescue | $2,000 |
| Chase Foundation | $1,915 |
| Trout Unlimited | $1,400 |
| Desert Community Foundation | $1,400 |
| Notre Dame High School | $500 |
| Eisenhower | $300 |
| Our Lady of Grace | $200 |
| Upward Bound House | $200 |
| Individual grant recipient | $100 |
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 (FY17–21, $16k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% 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.
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 +165% since the first grant, against +71% for the ones you funded once.
14 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 7 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, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1k 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
- PIPARTNERS IN CARE FOUNDATION5× · 2017–2024 · $43k · revenue +357%
- OHOPERATION HEALING FORCES INC3× · 2018–2021 · $15k · revenue +199%
- NHNATIONAL HEALTH FOUNDATION4× · 2018–2023 · $7k · revenue +258%
Funded once
- PPPAULIST PRODUCTIONS INCone grant, 2022 · $20k
- URUSC RISK MANAGEMENT PROGRAMone grant, 2018 · $5k
The Rand Corporationone grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +11%
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.
The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.
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 professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.
The ucla foundation is the giving, receiving, and investing arm of the ucla campus. the foundation enables private donors to help build, sustain and advance one of the world's finest academic and research institutions. private philanthropy…
The uc santa barbara foundation actively works to further the goals of the university of california, santa barbara. the foundation seeks to maintain and nurture the university's quality and distinction. on behalf of the campus, the…
The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
To improve the health and well-being of veterans and the general public by supporting a world-class biomedical research program conducted by ucsf faculty at the san francisco veterans affairs health care system.
Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…
To support and further the research, education and community service objectives of san diego state university.
Our mission is to accelerate scientific progress, understand the root causes of disease, and narrow the gap between discoveries and impact on patients.
To promote, support and further the interests and purposes of the arc of the united states, inc.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Health Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Fetchin' Retrievers Rescue. 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 31 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% 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.
22 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. 22 of the 52 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 PARTNERS IN CARE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds OPERATION HEALING FORCES INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FETCHIN' RETRIEVERS RESCUE ↗
- Who funds The Rand Corporation ↗
- Who funds VETERANS PARK CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S BURN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE CHASE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ABERCROMBIE & KENT PHILANTHROPY INC ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION TO ERADICATE DUCHENNE INC ↗
- Who funds DESERT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HERE TO SERVE INC ↗
- Who funds DESERT SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN WILDLIFE REFUGE INC ↗
- Who funds NOTRE DAME HIGH SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds GIRL SCOUTS HEART OF CENTRAL CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds FRAXA Research Foundation 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 Ahmanson Foundation · Arthur J Gallagher Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Charities Aid Foundation America · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · 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 Sullivan 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.