Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Colava Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$20k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Philanthropy$64kAnimals$45kHuman Services$12kHealth$10kScience & Tech$10kFood & Nutrition$6kArts & Culture$5kPublic Benefit$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Muttville$15,000
Stand Together Bay Area Fund$5,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 34% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%St Peter Community Free Clinic: $5k → 9%MADE Museum: $3k → 10%Muttville: $20k → 10%Zig Foundation: $10k → 17%Software Freedom Conservancy: $10k → 20%Fight 2 Feed: $3k → 8%The Talking Farm: $3k → 14%Nonzero Foundation: $2k → 11%MADE Museum: $2k → 10%Muttville: $15k → 10%Zig Foundation: $5k → 17%The Talking Farm: $1k → 14%Muttville: $10k → 10%Family Action Network: $2k → 14%Evanston Police and Fire Foundation: $500 → 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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 96% of The Colava Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Colava Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

66%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$103k · 5 repeat orgs$52k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
10

Total granted

$103k
$47k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+4%
+52%

Still filing today

40%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHuman ServicesScience & TechPublic BenefitEducationFood & NutritionOther
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

  • M
    MUTTVILLE
    3× · 2023–2025 · $45k · revenue +4%
  • G
    GivingWell
    2× · 2021–2022 · $34k
  • ZF
    Zig Foundation
    2× · 2020–2021 · $15k

Funded once

  • GIVEDIRECTLY INC
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue -32%
  • SOFTWARE FREEDOM CONSERVANCY INC
    one grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue 0%
  • G
    GiveWell
    one grant, 2023 · $7k
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
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
2
Wedontwaste Inc

We Dont Waste increases food access and protects the planet by rescuing and repurposing food, while educating and advocating to increase food security and decrease food waste.

Food & Nutrition
3
Zero Foodprint

Zero foodprint is mobilizing the food world around agricultural climate solutions. our work aims to create a circular economy that incentivizes practices that actively draw down carbon dioxide and offer our best hope of addressing the…

Food & Nutrition
4
Mercy for Animals Inc

Mercy for animals' mission is to construct a compassionate food system that is not just kind to animals but essential for the future of our planet and all who share it. our vision of a world where animals are respected, protected, and free…

Animals
5
Fair Food Network Inc

Fair food network is organized to grow community health, wealth, and resilience through food, to increase access to affordable healthy food, help local food economies thrive and build resilience in local food and agriculture systems.

Food & Nutrition
6
Extrafood

Food Rescue - The Organization rescues excess fresh food from Bay Area businesses, schools and non-profits and immediately delivers the food to safety net partners - such as senior housing centers, after-school programs, and homeless…

Food & Nutrition
7
Farm2People

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

Food & Nutrition
8
Food Action

Our mission is to educate, organize and advocate for food and farming systems to become economically prosperous, ecologically sound and socially equitable.

—
9
Animal Outlook Inc

Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.

Animals
10
Feeding It Forward Inc

Feeding It Forward works to reduce food waste and alleviate hunger in Napa County through collaboration efforts with other community based organizations. We recover perishable and prepared food from over 50+ donors and deliver it to 40+…

Food & Nutrition
11
Food & Water Watch

Food & water watch conducts extensive research and public education to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainably produced. so we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of…

Food & Nutrition
12
Food Animal Concerns Trust (Fact Inc)

Food animal concerns trust (fact) promotes the safe and humane production of meat, milk, and eggs. fact envisions that all food-producing animals be raised in a healthy and humane manner so that everyone will have access to safe and…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Nonzero Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is FIGHT2FEED a Charitable Organization. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

8 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. 8 of the 16 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
6/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GivingWell: $34,200 · OtherGivingWellZig Foundation: $15,000 · OtherZig FoundationGiveWell: $7,000 · OtherGiveWellSt Peter Community Free Clinic: $5,000 · OtherSt Peter Community Free ClinicTHE VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE CLINIC: $5,000 · OtherTHE VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE CLINICStand Together Bay Area Fund: $5,000 · OtherStand Together Bay Area FundMADE Museum: $5,000 · OtherMADE MuseumPAUSE AI US: $3,000 · Other+2 more: $2,500 · OtherMUTTVILLE: $45,000 · AnimalsMUTTVILLEGIVEDIRECTLY INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesSOFTWARE FREEDOM CONSERVANCY INC: $10,000 · Science & TechTHE TALKING FARM: $3,500 · EducationFIGHT2FEED A CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION: $2,500 · Food & NutritionTHE NONZERO FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 · Public Benefit
Other$81,700Animals$45,000Human Services$10,000Science & Tech$10,000Education$3,500Food & Nutrition$2,500Public Benefit$2,000

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 budgetMUTTVILLE: $45,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetGIVEDIRECTLY INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE CLINIC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE TALKING FARM: $3,500 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetFIGHT2FEED A CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION: $2,500 over 1y, 7.4% of budgetFAMILY ACTION NETWORK: $2,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE NONZERO FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 over 1y, 1.2% 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.

The Bank of America Charitable Foundation IncNC10.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Colava Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Colava Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 16 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 Colava’s filings →

    More from the funding graph