Skip to content
The Appleton Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

The Appleton Foundation

Its FY2022 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$933k
Granted FY2020
30
Grants FY2020
3
States reached
$353k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02Its granteesRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0171% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2022.

Philanthropy$865kHealth$121kReligion$115kHuman Services$111kEnvironment$81kCivil Rights$80kHousing & Shelter$50kEmployment$32kOther$0
02FY2020 · 30 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 30 grants below total $754,400, the rows itemized in this filing. The $933,250 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $178,850 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2020

  • Under $10k5 grants · $17k
  • $10k–50k24 grants · $384k
  • $250k+1 grant · $353k
$15,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Tides Center$353,000
Community Action Board of Santa Cruz Co$31,500
CESE$30,000
National Women's Health Network$23,000
SERAPAZ$20,000
FUNDAECO$20,000
UCIZONI$18,000
Pajaro Valley Community Health Trust$17,500
Positive Discipline Community Resources$17,500
Social Good Fund$17,500
Walnut Avenue Women's Center$17,500
Resource Center for Nonviolence$15,000
Asociacion Todos Los Derechos Para Todc$15,000
Centro Fray Julian Garces$15,000
CORECO Comision de Apoyo a la Unidad$15,000
02Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

65%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$644k · 20 repeat orgs$343k to everyone else

20 repeat relationships: 20 still active in FY2020, 0 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
13

Total granted

$644k
$228k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+122%
+190%

Still filing today

30%
31%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $115k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20
HealthYouth DevelopmentRecreation & SportsFood & NutritionInternationalEmploymentOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • NW
    National Women's Health Network
    2× · 2019–2020 · $56k · revenue +259%
  • PV
    PAJARO VALLEY COMMUNITY HEALTH TRUST
    2× · 2019–2020 · $43k · revenue +34%
  • TS
    The Santa Cruz Lesbian and Gay Community Center
    2× · 2019–2020 · $26k · revenue +122%

Funded once

  • HM
    HOUSING MATTERSgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +592%
  • PD
    Positive Discipline Community Resource
    one grant, 2019 · $30k
  • G
    Grufides
    one grant, 2019 · $23k
How this is measured

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

03Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
2
California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance

California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.

Environment
3
Sustainable Conservation

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…

Environment
4
Jobs with Justice San Francisco

A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…

Employment
5
Ecology Action of Santa Cruz

The primary and specific purpose for which the said corporation is formed is to empower individuals, businesses and communities to take actions today that achieve environmental and economic sustainability. The activities of the corporation…

Environment
6
Just Communities Central Coast

At Just Communities we work to ensure that Central Coast schools, organizations, and communities are places of opportunity, not places of limitation. We advance justice by engaging our community in leadership development, dialogue, action…

Civil Rights
7
Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy

CAUSE's mission is to build grassroots power to realize social, economic and environmental justice for the people of the Central Coast Region through policy research, leadership development, organizing and advocacy.

Community Improvement
8
Boulder Watershed Collective

The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…

Environment
9
Green Foothills Foundation dba Green Foothills

Our mission is to protect local nature and farmland to ensure a healthy environment for everyone.

—
10
Pacific Rivers

Education, advocacy and research related to the conservation of watersheds, rivers, and aquatic species.

Environment
11
Santa Cruz Local Inc

Independent nonpartisan newsroom serving Santa Cruz County, California we are all watching and engaged in our local government, our needs are addressed, democracy works better and our community is stronger.

—
12
Sequoia Riverlands Trust

We conserve the lands and waters of California's heartland.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Friends of the River Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Canticle Farm. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

14 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 14 of the 43 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
13/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

TIDES CENTER: $822,000 · Human ServicesTIDES CENTER+1 more: $17,500 · Human ServicesCESE: $60,000 · OtherCESEHOUSING MATTERS: $50,000 · OtherHOUSING MATTERSSERAPAZ: $45,000 · OtherSERAPAZWalnut Avenue Women's Center: $42,500 · OtherResource Center for Nonviolence: $40,000 · OtherUCIZONI: $36,000 · OtherCentro Fray Julian Garces: $35,000 · OtherJustapaz - Iglesia Cristiana Menonita: $35,000 · OtherYES: $30,000 · OtherHub for Sustainable Living: $30,000 · OtherPositive Discipline Community Resource: $30,000 · OtherCDH Zeferino Ladrillero / Asoc TDT: $28,000 · Other+23 more: $347,700 · Other+23 moreNational Women's Health Network: $56,000 · HealthPAJARO VALLEY COMMUNITY HEALTH TRUST: $42,500 · HealthSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $42,500 · EducationCommunity Action Board: $31,500 · EmploymentFoodWhat Incorporated: $20,000 · Youth DevelopmentFRIENDS OF THE RIVER FOUNDATION: $10,200 · Recreation & Sports
Human Services$839,500Other$809,200Health$98,500Education$42,500Employment$31,500Youth Development$20,000Recreation & Sports$10,200

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTIDES CENTER: $822,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetNational Women's Health Network: $56,000 over 2y, 2.2% of budgetSOCIAL GOOD FUND INC: $42,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPAJARO VALLEY COMMUNITY HEALTH TRUST: $42,500 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetCommunity Action Board: $31,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetThe Santa Cruz Lesbian and Gay Community Center: $25,500 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetFoodWhat Incorporated: $20,000 over 2y, 2.3% of budgetPOSITIVE DISCIPLINE COMMUNITY RESOURCES: $17,500 over 1y, 9.8% of budgetTuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance: $15,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCalWild: $14,200 over 2y, 1.6% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE RIVER FOUNDATION: $10,200 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetCanticle Farm: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds TIDES CENTER ↗
  • Who funds National Women's Health Network ↗
  • Who funds HOUSING MATTERS ↗
  • Who funds SOCIAL GOOD FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds PAJARO VALLEY COMMUNITY HEALTH TRUST ↗
  • Who funds Community Action Board ↗
  • Who funds The Santa Cruz Lesbian and Gay Community Center ↗
  • Who funds FoodWhat Incorporated ↗
  • Who funds POSITIVE DISCIPLINE COMMUNITY RESOURCES ↗
  • Who funds Tuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance ↗
  • Who funds CalWild ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE RIVER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Canticle Farm ↗
  • Who funds FUND FOR GLOBAL HUMAN RIGHTS INC ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Community Foundation …Monterey Peninsula Fo…Dignity HealthPatagoniaorgSilicon Valley Commun…Kaiser Foundation Hos…Firedoll FoundationSutter Bay HospitalsSunlight GivingThe David and Lucile …East Bay Community Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…
Community Foundation Santa Cruz CountyCA24× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation Santa Cruz County · Monterey Peninsula Foundation · Dignity Health · Patagoniaorg · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Firedoll Foundation · Sutter Bay Hospitals · Sunlight Giving · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Appleton Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Appleton 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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 43 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2022) is on record and reports $210k of grant expense with no grantee named in the published copy. A private foundation itemizes every grant it makes, so a return carrying none has filed its list as an attachment that the public copy does not include. The figures above are therefore from FY2020, the most recent year this funder’s grantee list reached the public record.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Appleton’s filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home