· Private foundation
The Green Street Foundation of San Francisco
Its FY2018 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: 43% of THE GREEN STREET FOUNDATION OF SAN FRANCISCO’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 · FY2018
- Under $10k5 grants · $22k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $141k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $212k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE - NYU SCHOOL OF LAW | $88,238 |
| LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE | $70,590 |
| CONSTITUTIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY CENTER | $52,942 |
| CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER | $35,295 |
| COMMITTEE TO PROJECT JOURNALISTS - DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT | $35,295 |
| PROPUBLICA | $35,295 |
| THE CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEGRITY | $35,295 |
| BRENNAN CENTER FOR JUSTICE - NYU SCHOOL OF LAW | $9,989 |
| NPR | $3,000 |
| PROJECT NIGHT NIGHT | $3,000 |
| ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION | $3,000 |
| CHARITY WATER | $3,000 |
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, $11k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 50% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
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.
7 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2018, 0 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (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 FY2018, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $159k 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
LAWYERS FOR CIVIL RIGHTS INC2× · 2017–2018 · $106k · revenue +161%- EFElectronic Frontier Foundation Inc2× · 2017–2018 · $6k · revenue +24%
CHARITY GLOBAL INC2× · 2017–2018 · $6k · revenue +36%
Funded once
- DDEMOSone grant, 2017 · $35k
- ACAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTH CAROLINA LEGAL FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +263%
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.
Preservation of civil liberties through litigation and public education.
The center for popular democracy (cpd) and its affiliates know that everyday people have the power to change the world. we upend business and politics as usual to forge a representative, multiracial government and society where we all…
The american civil liberties union of northern california (aclu nc union) defends and advances the principles of freedom, equality and justice contained in the united states constitution. aclu nc union, a california mutual benefit…
The foundation works to defend and promote the constitution of the united states, focusing especially on the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth, and 14th amendments. the foundation also works to defend and promote the constitution of the…
The center for american progress (cap) is an independent nonpartisan policy institute that is dedicated to improving the lives of all americans through bold, progressive ideas, as well as strong leadership and concerted action. our aim is…
To advance economic and social liberties and a free enterprise society through strategic litigation, training, communication, activism and research. in addition, the center will train law students, lawyers and policy activists in the…
Public interest legal activities
Public knowledge promotes freedom of expression, an open internet, and access to affordable communications tools and creative works. we work to shape policy on behalf of the public interest.
The aclu foundation of oregon is dedicated to preserving and defending civil liberties and civil rights.
Council for court excellence's (cce's) mission is to bring people together to conduct research, educate, and advocate to make d.c.'s unique legal systems more just, equitable, and accountable to the community.
To advance the science of jurisprudence; to establish a closer relationship of the members with the state bar association of california; to promote the administration of justice and the uniformity of legislation and judicial decisions; to…
The american civil liberties union foundation of northern california (aclu nc foundation) defends and advances the principles of freedom, equality and justice contained in the united states constitution. aclu nc foundation, a california…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Campaign Legal Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Charity Global Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
10 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. 10 of the 14 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 LAWYERS FOR CIVIL RIGHTS INC ↗
- Who funds CONSTITUTIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR PUBLIC INTEGRITY ↗
- Who funds THE CAMPAIGN LEGAL CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds PRO PUBLICA INC ↗
- Who funds SONOMA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF NORTH CAROLINA LEGAL FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Electronic Frontier Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds CHARITY GLOBAL INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT NIGHT NIGHT ↗
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: Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Green Street Foundation of San Francisco 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.
- Lawyers for Civil Rights Inc — 1% 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.