Skip to content
The Bellwether Foundation II at a glance

· Private foundation

The Bellwether Foundation II

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.

$350k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$1.7MPublic Benefit$1.3MCrime & Legal$610kHealth$495kPhilanthropy$430kFood & Nutrition$360kHuman Services$310kCivil Rights$265kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $100k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $250k
$50,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FAMILY VIOLENCE APPELLATE PROJECT$50,000
VOTE SOLAR$50,000
FREEFROM$50,000
CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP TO END DOMESTIC VIOLENCE$50,000
FAMILY VIOLENCE LAW CENTER$50,000
GROUNDSWELL INC$35,000
COALITION FOR GREEN CAPITAL$35,000
BREAKTHROUGH INSTITUTE$30,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY23–25, $150k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%FREEFROM: $50k → 14%FREEFROM: $50k → 14%FREEFROM: $50k → 14%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.6M · 19 repeat orgs$714k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +41% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
17

Total granted

$4.6M
$714k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
0%

Still filing today

95%
59%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentCivil RightsHealthEducationInternationalCrime & LegalOther
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

  • CF
    COALITION FOR GREEN CAPITAL D/B/A AMERICAN GREEN BANK CONSORTIUM
    9× · 2017–2025 · $450k · revenue ×20
  • GI
    GROUNDSWELL INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $385k · revenue +357%
  • Family Violence Law Center
    7× · 2019–2025 · $320k · revenue +107%

Funded once

  • PROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT
    one grant, 2024 · $100k · revenue 0%
  • TF
    TIDES FOUNDATION - MOVEMENT VOTER FUND
    one grant, 2020 · $100k
  • SU
    STATES UNITED DEMOCRACY CENTER INC
    one grant, 2024 · $100k · revenue 0%
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.

04Its 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
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
3
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
4
Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

Environment
5
Legal Advocates for Safe Science and Technology Inc

Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.

Science & Tech
6
Center for Arms Control and

A nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization dedicated to enhancing international peace and security in the 21st century, thereby retaining its focus on nuclear weapons but expanding to include other present emerging security threats.

International
7
Center for International Policy Inc

The center for international policy is a woman-led, progressive, independent nonprofit center for research, education, and advocacy working to advance a more peaceful, just, and sustainable u.s. approach to foreign policy. through…

International
8
Climate Breakthrough Inc

To launch breakthrough climate mitigation efforts by identifying, supporting, and unleashing innovative leaders with transformative strategies.

Human Services
9
Transformca dba Transform

Transform works to ensure that people of all incomes thrive in a world safe from climate chaos.

Community Improvement
10
Environment Next Inc

Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…

Environment
11
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
12
Upturn Inc

Upturn advances equity and justice in the design, governance, and use of technology.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Futures Without Violence; the most unlike its peers is Maitri. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

32 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. 32 of the 40 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)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
32/32
Grantees still filing
19/32
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COALITION FOR GREEN CAPITAL D/B/A AMERICAN GREEN BANK CONSORTIUM: $450,000 · EnvironmentCOALITION FOR GREEN CAPITAL D/B/…GROUNDSWELL INC: $385,000 · EnvironmentGROUNDSWELL INCVote Solar: $290,000 · EnvironmentVote SolarThe Breakthrough Institute: $245,000 · EnvironmentThe Breakthrough InstituteNEW VENTURE FUND: $115,000 · EnvironmentNEW VENTURE FUNDCIVILIZATION WORKS: $85,000 · EnvironmentPesticide Action Network North America: $75,000 · EnvironmentTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $440,000 · Civil RightsTHE VOTER PARTICIP…CALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP TO END DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: $240,000 · Civil RightsCALIFORNIA PARTNER…PROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT: $100,000 · Civil RightsPROTECT DEMOCRACY …STATES UNITED DEMOCRACY CENTER INC: $100,000 · Civil RightsSTATES UNITED DEMO…FAIRVOTE: $50,000 · Civil Rights+1 more: $25,000 · Civil RightsVOTO LATINO INC: $445,000 · OtherVOTO LATINO INCTIDES FOUNDATION - MOVEMENT VOTER FUND: $100,000 · OtherTIDES FOUNDATION - MOVEMENT…La Casa de las Madres: $80,000 · OtherLa Casa de las MadresIndividual grant recipient: $70,000 · OtherFUND FOR A SAFER FUTURE: $50,000 · OtherFreefrom: $150,000 · OtherFreefromMAITRI: $80,000 · OtherMAITRITHE COUNCIL ON STRATEGIC RISKS: $105,000 · OtherTHE COUNCIL ON STRATEGIC RI…CONTINA IMPACT: $50,000 · Other+10 more: $238,500 · Other+10 moreFamily Violence Law Center: $320,000 · Crime & LegalFamily Viol…FAMILY VIOLENCE APPELLATE PROJECT: $240,000 · Crime & LegalFAMILY VIOL…Center for Environmental Health: $360,000 · HealthCenter fo…BREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS: $135,000 · HealthBREAST CA…Center for Food Safety: $360,000 · Food & NutritionTIDES FOUNDATION: $250,000 · PhilanthropyROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $50,000 · PhilanthropyPLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC: $15,000 · Philanthropy
Environment$1,645,000Civil Rights$955,000Other$1,368,500Crime & Legal$560,000Health$495,000Food & Nutrition$360,000Philanthropy$315,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOALITION FOR GREEN CAPITAL D/B/A AMERICAN GREEN BANK CONSORTIUM: $450,000 over 9y, 5.0% of budgetVOTO LATINO INC: $445,000 over 6y, 2.3% of budgetTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $440,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetGROUNDSWELL INC: $385,000 over 8y, 2.7% of budgetCenter for Food Safety: $360,000 over 8y, 1.9% of budgetCenter for Environmental Health: $360,000 over 8y, 1.9% of budgetFamily Violence Law Center: $320,000 over 7y, 1.6% of budgetVote Solar: $290,000 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetTIDES FOUNDATION: $250,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetThe Breakthrough Institute: $245,000 over 8y, 1.8% of budgetFAMILY VIOLENCE APPELLATE PROJECT: $240,000 over 5y, 2.8% of budgetCALIFORNIA PARTNERSHIP TO END DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: $240,000 over 5y, 1.9% of budgetFreefrom: $150,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetBREAST CANCER PREVENTION PARTNERS: $135,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $115,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetTHE COUNCIL ON STRATEGIC RISKS: $105,000 over 3y, 3.9% of budgetPROTECT DEMOCRACY PROJECT: $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSTATES UNITED DEMOCRACY CENTER INC: $100,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLa Casa de las Madres: $80,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetMAITRI: $80,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetCONTINA IMPACT: $50,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAIRVOTE: $50,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetASSOCIATION OF INDEPENDENTS IN RADIO INC: $30,000 over 1y, 2.2% of budgetGLOBAL ZERO: $20,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetPLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFUTURES WITHOUT VIOLENCE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

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.

Silicon Valley Commun…The William & Flora H…Jewish Community Fede…John D and Catherine …Rockefeller Philanthr…The San Francisco Fou…California Physicians…Tides FoundationMarin Community Found…New Venture FundWomen's Foundation of…Jewish Communal Fund
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA22.9× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · John D and Catherine T Macarthur Foundation · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The San Francisco Foundation · California Physicians' Service Fdn Dba Blue Shield of California Fdn · Tides Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · New Venture Fund · Women's Foundation of California · Jewish Communal Fund

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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Bellwether Foundation II funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Bellwether Foundation II. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    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 40 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Bellwether Foundation II’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