· Private foundation
The Chuck and Ernestina Kreutzkamp Foundation
Its FY2024 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
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 51% of THE CHUCK AND ERNESTINA KREUTZKAMP FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $16k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $241k
- $50k–250k14 grants · $1.0M
- $250k+4 grants · $3.7M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PHILANTHROPIC IMPACT FOUNDATION | $2,490,000 |
| CATALYST PHILANTHROPY FUND | $530,000 |
| LOVE ONE INTERNATIONAL | $400,000 |
| YMCA OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY | $250,000 |
| WILDCOAST | $150,000 |
| SHARP HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| EMERIL LAGASSE FOUNDATION | $95,000 |
| XERCES SOCIETY INC | $95,000 |
| EASTER SEALS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INC | $85,000 |
| FOUR PAWS INTERNATIONAL INC | $80,000 |
| RAPTOR RESOURCE PROJECT | $60,000 |
| SANTA MONICA BAY RESTORATION FOUNDATION | $60,000 |
| JESSIE REES FOUNDATION | $60,000 |
| THE ECOLOGY CENTER | $55,000 |
| EMPOWERS AFRICA INC | $50,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $2.7M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, 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 10% of The Chuck and Ernestina Kreutzkamp Foundation’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, 71% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 61% — 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +21% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
28 repeat relationships — 19 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $895k 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
- YOYMCA OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY7× · 2018–2024 · $1.4M · revenue +89%
- LOLOVE ONE INTERNATIONAL3× · 2021–2024 · $900k · revenue +5%
- BGBoys & Girls Clubs of South County2× · 2020–2021 · $750k · revenue +46%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $2.3M
- OVOcean View Community Foundationone grant, 2020 · $1.0M · revenue -100% · 99% of their budget
- BGBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER SAN DIEGOgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $500k · revenue +35%
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.
The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.
To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.
As the only community foundation for the ocean, The Ocean Foundation's 501(c)(3) mission is to improve global ocean health, climate resilience, and the blue economy. We create partnerships to connect people in the communities in which we…
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…
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Leading Citizen scientists to promote stewardship of sustainable reef communities worldwide.
The Sierra Fund (TSF) is a non-profit organization with a mission to restore ecosystem and community resiliency in the Sierra Nevada.
The institute is dedicated to scientific research, the results of which are used to promote public awareness and education in the areas of conservation biology and ecology,including the wise use of natural resources.
California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.
We empower communities around the globe to protect sea turtles, corals, sharks, and the vital marine species and ecosystems they call home through hands-on conservation, education, and sustainable solutions. our team leads reef and beach…
See schedule odedicated to rescuing, protecting and providing sanctuary for elephants worldwide. our founding directors and elephant care specialist consult internationally for the wellbeing of captive elephants. currently based in brazil,…
Acquire, manage and protect land in perpetuity that supports sensitive habitats and species, and to educate and inspire people and communities as stewards and advocates of their natural environment.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jacobs & Cushman San Diego Food Bank and the most unlike its peers is Starkey Hearing Foundation. 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 22 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) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 6% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% 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.
77 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. 77 of the 84 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 PHILANTHROPIC IMPACT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC ↗
- Who funds PHILANTHROPIC IMPACT FUND ↗
- Who funds YMCA OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY ↗
- Who funds Ocean View Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds LOVE ONE INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds Boys & Girls Clubs of South County ↗
- Who funds Sharp Healthcare Foundation ↗
- Who funds Social Impact Fund ↗
- Who funds CATALYST PHILANTHROPY FUND ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER SAN DIEGO ↗
- Who funds Casa De Amparo ↗
- Who funds THE EMERIL LAGASSE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds WILDCOAST ↗
- Who funds JACOBS & CUSHMAN SAN DIEGO FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds EASTER SEALS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA INC ↗
- Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds THE ELLEN FUND ↗
- Who funds SAN DIEGO PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Jessie Rees Foundation ↗
- Who funds THORN ↗
- Who funds Starkey Hearing Foundation ↗
- Who funds Save The Children Federation Inc ↗
- Who funds ECOLOGY CENTER ↗
- Who funds The Legacy Cellar Foundation ↗
- Who funds NOAH HOMES INC ↗
- Who funds CENTRO SHALOM TIJUANA INC ↗
- Who funds SANTA MONICA BAY RESTORATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RAPTOR RESOURCE PROJECT ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds EASTERN CONGO INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF SAN DIEGO ↗
- Who funds EMPOWERS AFRICA INC ↗
- Who funds XERCES SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds Festival of Children Foundation ↗
- Who funds MAUI FOOD BANK INC ↗
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: The Stanley E Hanson Foundation · Living Legacy Foundation · Sempra Foundation · The San Diego Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of San Diego · The Conrad Prebys Foundation · G Harbaugh Foundation · Walter J & Betty C Zable Foundation · Rancho Santa Fe Foundation · David C Copley Foundation · Price Philanthropies Foundation · The Nordson Corporation 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 Chuck and Ernestina Kreutzkamp 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.
- Project Healing Waters Fly Fishing Inc — 46% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- 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 Chuck and Ernestina Kreutzkamp Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Chuck and Ernestina Kreutzkamp 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.