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

· Private foundation

The Britt George 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.

$74k
Granted FY2025still arriving
19
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0183% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Public Safety & Disaster$183kHealth$25kCrime & Legal$24kFood & Nutrition$21kEducation$18kPhilanthropy$15kAnimals$14kArts & Culture$13kOther$0
02FY2025 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k18 grants · $64k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$4,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$73k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE TREVOR PROJECT$10,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
JACOBS HEART$4,000
KIDPOWER INTERNATIONAL$4,000
SUNDAY FRIENDS FOUNDATION$4,000
SAN JOSE POLICE FOUNDATION$4,000
FAMILIES IN TRANSITION$4,000
OUTSIDE IN$4,000
FRIENDS OF SANTA CRUZ STATE PARKS$4,000
LOVED TWICE$4,000
TEEN KITCHEN PROJECT$4,000
LOAVES AND FISHES FAMILY KITCHEN$4,000
GIFFORDS LAW CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE$4,000
RECOVERY CAFE SAN JOSE$4,000
ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF SAN JOSE$4,000
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 (FY25–25, $16k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 50% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 8%LOVED TWICE: $4k → 10%SUNDAY FRIENDS FOUNDATION: $4k → 8%FAMILIES IN TRANSITION: $4k → 13%RECOVERY CAFE SAN JOSE: $4k → 8%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.

55%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$264k · 5 repeat orgs$214k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +28% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
37

Total granted

$264k
$149k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+14%

Still filing today

20%
32%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 12% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $65k 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
AnimalsHuman ServicesHealthCrime & LegalFood & NutritionCivil RightsOther
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

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    2× · 2018–2020 · $175k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    4× · 2022–2025 · $56k
  • LF
    LOAVES & FISHES FAMILY KITCHEN
    2× · 2024–2025 · $18k · revenue +28%

Funded once

  • JH
    JW HOUSE
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -7%
  • SR
    SJ ROTARY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2018 · $10k
  • OA
    OLD ADOBE CHARTER SCHOOL
    one grant, 2024 · $10k
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
San Francisco Public Press

The mission of the San Francisco Public Press is to enrich civic life by publishing investigative and solutions journalism that engages diverse audiences and promotes public accountability. The San Francisco Public Press…

Education
2
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County

The SPCA Monterey County's Mission is assuring compassionate treatment of all animals through rescue, rehabilitation, protection and education. The SPCA shelters homeless, neglected, and abused pets, including dogs, cats, horses, exotic…

Animals
3
Project Street Vet

Project Street Vet empowers veterinary teams to deliver professional, non-judgmental medical care & support to pet families experiencing homelessness and housing vulnerability.

Animals
4
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.

—
5
Nine Lives Foundation Dba Nine Lives

We are a community-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization operating a cat-onlyclinic and adoption center. We rescue at-risk cats and kittens, provide them withclinical care and nurturing to address their medical and behavioral needs and…

Animals
6
Legal Aid Society of San Mateo County

We use the law to make the social safety net work for everyone in San Mateo County. We represent clients, empower people to advocate for themselves, and fix broken systems through policy change.

Crime & Legal
7
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
8
The Samaritan Center-Simi Valley

The mission of the Samaritan Center-Simi Valley is to offer people experiencing housing and food insecurity supportive services essential to human dignity.

Housing & Shelter
9
Family Promise of Santa Clarita Valley

With assistance of volunteers from the community and faith groups, the organization works to assist homeless children and their families to achieve sustainable independence, while offering hope, compassion, and preserving individual…

Housing & Shelter
10
Santa Cruz Spca and Humane Society

The Santa Cruz SPCA provides safe harbor for animals in need and promotes an active humane community through adoption, advocacy, and education.

Animals
11
Spot

SPOT Saving Pets One at a Time is a leading San Diego County all-volunteer rescue organization whose main focus is to save dogs and cats in shelters who are at risk of euthanization and to help other dogs and cats in need as well. In…

Animals
12
Farm2People

Farm2People's mission is to secure local harvests and fight hunger in Greater Los Angeles.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Humane Society of Napa County & Spca Inc; the most unlike its peers is Charlies Acres. 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

26 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. 26 of the 59 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)
26/26
Grantees still filing
10/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $175,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $56,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+40 more: $156,071 · Other+40 moreLOAVES & FISHES FAMILY KITCHEN: $17,500 · Food & NutritionHopes Corner Inc: $2,500 · Food & NutritionCharlies Acres: $5,000 · AnimalsNurtured by Nature: $5,000 · AnimalsSILICON VALLEY PET PROJECT: $5,000 · AnimalsRancho Roben Rescues Inc: $2,500 · AnimalsHumane Society of Napa County & SPCA INC: $1,000 · AnimalsFAMILIES IN TRANSITION INC: $4,000 · Human ServicesLoved Twice: $4,000 · Human ServicesRecovery Cafe San Jose: $4,000 · Human ServicesSUNDAY FRIENDS FOUNDATION: $4,000 · Human ServicesTREVOR PROJECT INC: $10,000 · Civil RightsGIFFORDS LAW CENTER TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE: $4,000 · Civil RightsJW HOUSE: $10,000 · HealthBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $2,500 · HealthLEGAL AID OF SONOMA COUNTY: $5,000 · Crime & LegalSan Jose Police Foundation: $4,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$387,071Food & Nutrition$20,000Animals$18,500Human Services$16,000Civil Rights$14,000Health$12,500Crime & Legal$9,000

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 budgetLOAVES & FISHES FAMILY KITCHEN: $17,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetJW HOUSE: $10,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetTREVOR PROJECT INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCharlies Acres: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNurtured by Nature: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetLEGAL AID OF SONOMA COUNTY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetROTAPLAST INTERNATIONAL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSILICON VALLEY PET PROJECT: $5,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetKIDPOWER TEENPOWER FULLPOWER International: $4,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetOUTSIDE IN: $4,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFAMILIES IN TRANSITION INC: $4,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF SAN JOSE: $4,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetSan Jose Police Foundation: $4,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetLoved Twice: $4,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFRIENDS OF SANTA CRUZ STATE PARKS: $4,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTEEN KITCHEN PROJECT: $4,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLocal Color: $2,500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHopes Corner Inc: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetRancho Roben Rescues Inc: $2,500 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetNEPHCURE KIDNEY INTERNATIONAL: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHumane Society of Napa County & SPCA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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…AbbVie FoundationThe Blackbaud Giving …Paypal Charitable Giv…The Bank of America C…Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…American Endowment Fo…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Network for GoodDonor Advised Charita…
Silicon Valley Community FoundationCA16× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · AbbVie Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · American Endowment Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

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

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Britt George Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Britt George 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 59 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 Britt George’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