· Private foundation
The Artemisia Fund
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 FY2022–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $12k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $62k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SANTA BARBARA BOTANIC GARDEN | $61,959 |
| EARTHJUSTICE | $10,325 |
| GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL | $10,000 |
| WILDERNESS YOUTH PROJECT | $5,150 |
| OAKLAND INSTITUTE | $5,000 |
| XERCES SOCIETY | $1,000 |
| CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY | $1,000 |
| INATURALIST | $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 (FY22–22, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 92% of The Artemisia Fund’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. Read by recipient address, 76% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 7% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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 — 5 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 3 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; $11k 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
- SBSANTA BARBARA BOTANIC GARDEN4× · 2022–2025 · $142k · revenue +74%
- GWGEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL4× · 2022–2025 · $40k
- TOThe Oakland Institute4× · 2022–2025 · $30k · revenue -27%
Funded once
- SESustainable Economies Law Centergraduatedone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +44%
- FOFEDERATION OF SOUTHERN COOPERATIVESgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +48%
- DRDarkness RISING Projectgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $5k · revenue +172%
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 fight against fossil fuel executives and industries that have turned our communities into dumping grounds for toxic waste, poisoning our air, water, lan, and bodies. We organize to oppose giant oil refineries, dirty…
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…
To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.
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…
California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Provide scientific support and tools for decision making and communication through collaborative efforts.
Bay Nature connects the people of the San Francisco Bay Area to our natural world and motivates people to solve problems with nature in mind. Our vision is that all people have a close relationship with theirnatural world.
Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.
Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.
To increase public awareness of elected officials' performances on environmental issues, to influence decisions of public officials on environmental legislation and policy, and to engage in related social welfare activities to promote and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Soul Fire Farm Institute Inc and the most unlike its peers is Center for Institutional Courage Inc. 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 27 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) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 2% 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.
27 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. 27 of the 29 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 SANTA BARBARA BOTANIC GARDEN ↗
- Who funds The Oakland Institute ↗
- Who funds Wilderness Youth Project Inc ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Sustainable Economies Law Center ↗
- Who funds FEDERATION OF SOUTHERN COOPERATIVES ↗
- Who funds Darkness RISING Project ↗
- Who funds Central California Environmental Justice Network ↗
- Who funds ACCESS REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Center for Institutional Courage Inc ↗
- Who funds Freefrom ↗
- Who funds Jenesse Center Inc ↗
- Who funds REFUGEE & IMMIGRANT CENTER FOR EDUCATION & LEGAL SERVICES ↗
- Who funds THE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds THE AFRICAN AMERICAN POLICY FORUM INC ↗
- Who funds California Native Plant Society ↗
- Who funds SOUL FIRE FARM INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE ALLIANCE FOR SELF-DIRECTED EDUCATION INC ↗
- Who funds FUND FOR SANTA BARBARA INC ↗
- Who funds LOS PADRES FORESTWATCH INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NETWORK OF ABORTION FUNDS INC ↗
- Who funds SANTA BARBARA CHANNELKEEPER INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds TRUE NATURE SOCIETY QUAIL SPRINGS ↗
- Who funds XERCES SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds INATURALIST ↗
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: Marin Community Foundation · The McCune Foundation · Hutton Foundation Dba Hutton Parker Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · The Osherenko-Young Foundation · Patricia Bragg Foundation · Fund for Santa Barbara Inc · Www Foundation · Santa Barbara Foundation · Clif Family Foundation · Rsf Social Finance 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 The Artemisia Fund 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.
- Xerces Society Inc — 22% 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 The Artemisia Fund?
Find your warmest path to The Artemisia Fund 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.