· Private foundation
The Crary Social Ecology Fund
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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
90% of The Crary Social Ecology Fund’s FY2025 grant dollars went to California Community Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year The Crary Social Ecology Fund named its own grantees at scale: 13 organizations, $1M. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2022
- Under $10k4 grants · $20k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
- $50k–250k16 grants · $960k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| VETERAN RITES INC | $100,000 |
| INFORMED CONSENT ACTION NETWORK | $100,000 |
| VETERAN RITES INC | $100,000 |
| AMERICAN FRONT LINE NURSES | $60,000 |
| THE UNITY PROJECT | $50,000 |
| CREATEYOURSCHOLARSHIPORG | $50,000 |
| THE UNITY PROJECT | $50,000 |
| THE ESCALA INITIATIVE | $50,000 |
| UNITY HEALTH FOUNDATION | $50,000 |
| AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH & TECH | $50,000 |
| FRONTLINE COVID-19 CRITICAL CARE ALLIANCE | $50,000 |
| REACT 19 | $50,000 |
| CREATEYOURSCHOLARSHIPORG | $50,000 |
| PERK-PROTECTION OF THE EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS OF KIDS | $50,000 |
| AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH & TECH | $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 (FY17–18, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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.
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.
21 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2022, 12 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- ICINFORMED CONSENT ACTION NETWORK2× · 2021–2022 · $200k · revenue +15%
- POProtection of the Educational Rights of Kids2× · 2022–2023 · $125k · revenue +25%
- CWCIVILIZATION WORKS6× · 2018–2023 · $120k · revenue +184%
Funded once
- HFHEALTH FREEDOM FOR HUMANITYone grant, 2021 · $60k
- UDUC DAVIS COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCESone grant, 2020 · $20k
- SOSCHOOL OF LOST BORDERSgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $8k · revenue +88%
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.
Center for Humane Technology is a nonprofit dedicated to ensuring that the most consequential technologies actually serve humanity. We bring clarity to how the tech ecosystem works in order to shift the incentives that drive it.
Center for Intimacy Justice (CIJ) works to create equity and wellbeing in people's intimate lives. CIJ's first program is changing Big Tech platforms discriminatory suppression of womens sexual and reproductive health information online.
Our mission is to help people holistically come off psychiatric medications by empowering them to connect to their inner wisdom and heal root causes of dis-ease.
To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.
The Buckminster Fuller Institute is dedicated to accelerating the development and deployment of solutions which radically advance human well being and the health of our planet's ecosystems.
Epic's mission is to secure the fundamental right to privacy in the digital age for all people through advocacy, research, and litigation.
U.s. right to know is a nonprofit newsroom and public health research group. we investigate and report on corporate wrongdoing and government failures that threaten our health, environment or food system.
The Oakland Institute, an independent policy think tank, works to support global struggles for Indigenous rights, human rights, and land rights and to promote public participation and fair debate on critical social, economic, and…
The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.
Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children's Health Defense and the most unlike its peers is Createyourscholarship org. 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 18 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) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% 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.
30 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. 30 of the 43 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 CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ESCALA INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds INFORMED CONSENT ACTION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds INDEPENDENT MEDICAL ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids ↗
- Who funds CIVILIZATION WORKS ↗
- Who funds Wellness Forum Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ↗
- Who funds Createyourscholarship org ↗
- Who funds One World Childrens Fund ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S HEALTH DEFENSE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN FRONTLINE NURSES ↗
- Who funds Community Agroecology Network ↗
- Who funds REACT19 INC ↗
- Who funds UC SANTA CRUZ FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AT THE CROSSROADS ↗
- Who funds FREEDOM FOR ALL INC ↗
- Who funds Skyline Harvest Inc ↗
- Who funds The Breakthrough Institute ↗
- Who funds SCHOOL OF LOST BORDERS ↗
- Who funds AXIS MUNDI CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH ↗
- Who funds ST JOHNS RETIREMENT VILLAGE ↗
- Who funds EQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE ↗
- Who funds SIDE BY SIDE VA INC ↗
- Who funds RAINBOW LODGE RETREAT CENTER ↗
- Who funds Boys to Men Mentoring Network Inc ↗
- Who funds MULTIDISCIPLINARY ASSOCIATION FOR PSYCHEDELIC STUDIES 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: California Community Foundation · Donors Trust Inc · Bradley Impact Fund Inc · Marin Community Foundation · The Minneapolis Foundation · T Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Renaissance Charitable Foundation Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc
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 Crary Social Ecology Fund 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.
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.