Skip to content
The Crary Social Ecology Fund at a glance

· 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.

$1.0M
Granted FY2022
22
Grants FY2022
9
States reached
$100k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

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

7
’17
11
’18
9
’19
5
’20
12
’21
13
’22
9
’23
1
’24
0
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$3.0MHuman Services$1.3MHealth$860kEducation$417kInternational$275kEnvironment$200kSocial Science$100kFood & Nutrition$80kOther$0
02FY2022 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2022

  • Under $10k4 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
  • $50k–250k16 grants · $960k
$50,000
Median grant
9
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INFORMED CONSENT ACTION NETWORK$100,000
VETERAN RITES INC$100,000
VETERAN RITES INC$100,000
AMERICAN FRONT LINE NURSES$60,000
THE ESCALA INITIATIVE$50,000
CREATEYOURSCHOLARSHIPORG$50,000
CREATEYOURSCHOLARSHIPORG$50,000
AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH & TECH$50,000
REACT 19$50,000
UNITY HEALTH FOUNDATION$50,000
AMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH & TECH$50,000
THE UNITY PROJECT$50,000
THE UNITY PROJECT$50,000
FRONTLINE COVID-19 CRITICAL CARE ALLIANCE$50,000
PERK-PROTECTION OF THE EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS OF KIDS$50,000
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 (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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%AT THE CROSSROADS: $25k → 10%AT THE CROSSROADS: $5k → 10%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
WI
NY
NV
OH
NJ
CA
VA
MD
DE
KS
AR
DC
AL
TX
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.

81%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.8M · 21 repeat orgs$655k to everyone else

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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
12

Total granted

$2.8M
$130k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
+46%

Still filing today

71%
58%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
HealthEducationEnvironmentPhilanthropyYouth DevelopmentInternationalOther
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

  • IC
    INFORMED CONSENT ACTION NETWORK
    2× · 2021–2022 · $200k · revenue +15%
  • PO
    Protection of the Educational Rights of Kids
    2× · 2022–2023 · $125k · revenue +25%
  • CW
    CIVILIZATION WORKS
    6× · 2018–2023 · $120k · revenue +184%

Funded once

  • HF
    HEALTH FREEDOM FOR HUMANITY
    one grant, 2021 · $60k
  • UD
    UC DAVIS COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
    one grant, 2020 · $20k
  • SO
    SCHOOL OF LOST BORDERSgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $8k · revenue +88%
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
Center for Responsible Science
Philanthropy
2
Center for Humane Technology

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.

Science & Tech
3
Center for Intimacy Justice

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.

Civil Rights
4
The Conversationalist
—
5
Free Range Psychiatry Inc

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.

Health
6
Institute for Public Accuracy

To teach and disseminate educational materials to the public.

Arts & Culture
7
Buckminster Fuller Institute

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.

Science & Tech
8
Electronic Privacy Information Center

Epic's mission is to secure the fundamental right to privacy in the digital age for all people through advocacy, research, and litigation.

Civil Rights
9
Us Right to Know

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.

Human Services
10
The Oakland Institute

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…

Food & Nutrition
11
Open Markets Institute

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.

Education
12
Legal Advocates for Safe Science and Technology Inc

Using legal advocacy to make advances in science and technology safer for people and the planet.

Science & Tech
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children's Health Defense; 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.
04the grantee network

30 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. 30 of the 43 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
28/30
Grantees still filing
16/30
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,799,163 · PhilanthropyCALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION+2 more: $105,000 · PhilanthropyVETERAN RITES INC: $1,075,000 · OtherVETERAN RITES INCWARRIOR FILMS (VETERANS JOURNEY HOME): $171,500 · OtherWARRIOR FILMS (VETERANS JOURNEY HOM…THE UNITY PROJECT: $150,000 · OtherTHE UNITY PROJECT+19 more: $555,000 · Other+19 moreINFORMED CONSENT ACTION NETWORK: $200,000 · HealthINFORMED …INDEPENDENT MEDICAL ALLIANCE: $155,000 · HealthINDEPENDE…Wellness Forum Foundation Inc: $105,000 · HealthWellness …REACT19 INC: $50,000 · HealthREACT19 I…+3 more: $15,000 · HealthProtection of the Educational Rights of Kids: $125,000 · EducationCreateyourscholarship org: $100,000 · EducationAMERICAN BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE: $75,000 · EducationUC SANTA CRUZ FOUNDATION: $47,871 · Education+2 more: $9,500 · EducationCIVILIZATION WORKS: $120,000 · EnvironmentCHILDREN'S HEALTH DEFENSE: $70,000 · EnvironmentThe Breakthrough Institute: $20,000 · EnvironmentESCALA INITIATIVE INC: $200,000 · InternationalAMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY: $100,000 · Social Science
Philanthropy$2,904,163Other$1,951,500Health$525,000Education$357,371Environment$210,000International$200,000Social Science$100,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,799,163 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetINFORMED CONSENT ACTION NETWORK: $200,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetESCALA INITIATIVE INC: $200,000 over 4y, 11% of budgetINDEPENDENT MEDICAL ALLIANCE: $155,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetProtection of the Educational Rights of Kids: $125,000 over 2y, 4.4% of budgetCIVILIZATION WORKS: $120,000 over 6y, 5.8% of budgetWellness Forum Foundation Inc: $105,000 over 2y, 36% of budgetAMERICAN INSTITUTE FOR BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY: $100,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetCreateyourscholarship org: $100,000 over 1y, 75% of budgetAMERICAN BROWNSTONE INSTITUTE: $75,000 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetOne World Childrens Fund: $75,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetCHILDREN'S HEALTH DEFENSE: $70,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetAMERICAN FRONTLINE NURSES: $60,000 over 1y, 72% of budgetCommunity Agroecology Network: $60,000 over 6y, 5.1% of budgetREACT19 INC: $50,000 over 1y, 7.2% of budgetUC SANTA CRUZ FOUNDATION: $47,871 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetAT THE CROSSROADS: $30,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetThe Breakthrough Institute: $20,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetSCHOOL OF LOST BORDERS: $7,500 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetAXIS MUNDI CENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetEQUAL JUSTICE INITIATIVE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPhysicians for Informed Consent: $5,000 over 1y, 4.5% of budgetRAINBOW LODGE RETREAT CENTER: $5,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetST JOHNS RETIREMENT VILLAGE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSIDE BY SIDE VA INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetBoys to Men Mentoring Network Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMULTIDISCIPLINARY ASSOCIATION FOR PSYCHEDELIC STUDIES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

California Community …Donors Trust IncBradley Impact Fund I…Marin Community Found…The Minneapolis Found…T Rowe Price Program …Silicon Valley Commun…National Philanthropi…Vanguard Charitable E…Morgan Stanley Global…Renaissance Charitabl…Gs Donor Advised Phil…
California Community FoundationCA19.3× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

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

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 Crary Social Ecology Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Crary Social Ecology Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    2get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 43 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 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Crary Social Ecology’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