Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Bower Charitable 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.

$125k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$33k
Largest
01What you fund
0198% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20202025.

Environment$510kCivil Rights$15kInternational$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $33k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $93k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$131k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
North Coast Environmental Center$32,500
Environmental Protection Info Cente$30,000
Klamath Forest Alliance$30,000
Solar Cookers International$5,000
Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology$5,000
Alliance For Global Justice$5,000
Salmon River Restoration Council$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
Forest Service Employees For Env Et$5,000
Shasta Environmental Alliance$2,500
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 97% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Alliance For Global Justice: $5k → 15%Sierra Club Foundation: $5k → 10%Solar Cookers International: $5k → 12%Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology: $5k → 16%Safe Alternatives Forest Environmen: $6k → 17%Save Calif Salmon: $5k → 18%Madre': $5k → 17%Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands: $5k → 13%Alliance For Global Justice: $5k → 15%Sierra Club Foundation: $5k → 10%Solar Cookers International: $5k → 12%Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology: $5k → 16%Environmental Protection Info Cente: $30k → 18%Madre': $5k → 17%Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands: $5k → 13%Alliance For Global Justice: $5k → 15%Sierra Club Foundation: $2k → 10%Solar Cookers International: $5k → 12%Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology: $5k → 16%Klamath Forest Alliance: $30k → 18%Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands: $5k → 13%Solar Cookers International: $5k → 12%Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology: $5k → 16%Environmental Protection Info Cente: $29k → 18%Salmon River Restoratiion Council: $5k → 16%Environmental Protection Info Cente: $29k → 18%Salmon River Restoratiion Council: $5k → 16%Klamath Forest Alliance: $24k → 18%Salmon River Restoratiion Council: $5k → 16%Environmental Protection Info Cente: $24k → 18%Salmon River Restoration Council: $5k → 16%Klamath Forest Alliance: $24k → 18%Klamath Forest Alliance: $24k → 18%Environmental Protection Info Cente: $12k → 18%Klamath Forest Alliance: $12k → 18%Environmental Protection Info Cente: $6k → 18%Klamath Forest Alliance: $6k → 18%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$524k · 12 repeat orgs$16k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
2

Total granted

$524k
$11k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-8%
-7%

Still filing today

75%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentInternationalOther

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

  • KF
    KLAMATH FOREST ALLIANCE
    6× · 2020–2025 · $120k · revenue +1% · 47% of their budget
  • SR
    SALMON RIVER RESTORATION COUNCIL
    4× · 2021–2025 · $20k · revenue +57%
  • SC
    Solar Cookers International
    4× · 2021–2025 · $20k · revenue +81%

Funded once

  • SA
    Safe Alternatives Forest Environmen
    one grant, 2021 · $6k
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF THE EEL RIVER
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -7%

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

04Your field

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.

1
Southeast Alaska Conservation Council Inc-Seacc

SEACC's mission is to protect the special places of the world's largest temperate rainforest, promote conservation, and advocate for sustainability in human use of natural resources. Inspired by the land, wildlife, cultures, and…

Environment
2
The Sierra Fund

The Sierra Fund (TSF) is a non-profit organization with a mission to restore ecosystem and community resiliency in the Sierra Nevada.

Environment
3
Tuolumne River Preservation Trust dba Yosemite Rivers Alliance

At Yosemite Rivers Alliance, we unite conservation and community to protect and restore the three rivers that ?ow through the Yosemite Regionthe Tuolumne, Stanislaus, and Merced.

4
Friends of the Inyo

The Friends of the Inyos mission is to protect, and care for, the lands and waters of Californias Eastern Sierra.

Environment
5
Environmental Protection Information Center Inc

The specific purpose of this corporation is to channel public concern for the environment into action in the publics interest.

Environment
6
Sageland Collaborative

To provide science-based strategies for wildlife and land conservation.

Environment
7
Center for Sustainable Economy

Promoting economic sustainability

Environment
8
CalWild

The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.

9
Santa Fe Forest Coalition

Educate the public on forest conservation issues in New Mexico

Environment
10
California Environmental Justice Alliance

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…

Environment
11
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
12
Sonoma Ecology Center

The Mission of Sonoma Ecology Center is to work with our community to enhance and sustain ecological health in the Sonoma valley.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sierra Club Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Solar Cookers International. 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

10 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 15 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
4/10
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Northcoast Environmental Center — $125,000 · EnvironmentNorthcoast Environmental CenterKLAMATH FOREST ALLIANCE — $120,000 · EnvironmentKLAMATH FOREST ALLIANCESALMON RIVER RESTORATION COUNCIL — $20,000 · EnvironmentSALMON RIVER RESTORATION COUNCILSolar Cookers International — $20,000 · EnvironmentSolar Cookers InternationalKLAMATH-SISKIYOU WILDLANDS CENTER — $15,000 · EnvironmentSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION — $12,000 · Environment+1 more — $5,000 · EnvironmentEnvironmental Protection Info Cente — $130,000 · OtherEnvironmental Protection Info CenteFOREST SERVICE EMPLOYEES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS INC — $20,000 · OtherFOREST SERVICE EMPLOYEES FOR ENVIRONMENTA…Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology — $20,000 · OtherMount Shasta Bioregional EcologySHASTA ENVIRONMENTAL ALLIANCE — $16,500 · OtherSHASTA ENVIRONMENTAL ALLIANCE+2 more — $11,000 · Other+2 moreAlliance for Global Justice Corp — $15,000 · InternationalMADRE INC — $10,000 · International
Environment$317,000Other$197,500International$25,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNorthcoast Environmental Center — $125,000 over 6y, 7.4% of budgetKLAMATH FOREST ALLIANCE — $120,000 over 6y, 47% of budgetSALMON RIVER RESTORATION COUNCIL — $20,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetSolar Cookers International — $20,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetFOREST SERVICE EMPLOYEES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS INC — $20,000 over 4y, 1.2% of budgetAlliance for Global Justice Corp — $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetKLAMATH-SISKIYOU WILDLANDS CENTER — $15,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION — $12,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMADRE INC — $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE EEL RIVER — $5,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budget
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 Northcoast Environmental Center
  • Who funds KLAMATH FOREST ALLIANCE
  • Who funds SALMON RIVER RESTORATION COUNCIL
  • Who funds Solar Cookers International
  • Who funds FOREST SERVICE EMPLOYEES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS INC
  • Who funds Alliance for Global Justice Corp
  • Who funds KLAMATH-SISKIYOU WILDLANDS CENTER
  • Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION
  • Who funds MADRE INC
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE EEL RIVER

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.

PatagoniaorgCA15.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 The Bower Charitable 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 20%3%13%28%50%your share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    typical government reliance, FY2025

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Bower Charitable Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Bower Charitable 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 15 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph