Skip to content
The James a Folger and Jane C Folger Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The James a Folger and Jane C Folger Foundation

Its FY2023 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$39k
Granted FY2023
6
Grants FY2023
3
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0189% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Housing & Shelter$85kInternational$68kAnimals$35kRecreation & Sports$4kPublic Benefit$3kPhilanthropy$3kEnvironment$1kOther$0
02FY2023 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k4 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $25k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$533k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COMPASS FAMILY SERVICES$15,000
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE$10,000
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE$5,000
NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION$5,000
PUT ME IN$2,000
Individual grant recipient$2,000
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 (FY17–23, $85k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%COMPASS FAMILY SERVICES: $15k → 10%COMPASS FAMILY SERVICES: $15k → 10%COMPASS FAMILY SERVICES: $15k → 10%COMPASS FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 10%COMPASS FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 10%COMPASS FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 10%COMPASS FAMILY SERVICES: $10k → 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.
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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$197k · 7 repeat orgs$20k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +81% since the first grant, against +46% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2023, 2 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
7

Total granted

$197k
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+81%
+46%

Still filing today

86%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23
AnimalsInternationalHuman ServicesPublic BenefitYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • CF
    COMPASS FAMILY SERVICES
    7× · 2017–2023 · $85k · revenue +283%
  • IR
    International Rescue Committee INC
    7× · 2017–2023 · $57k · revenue +81%
  • NW
    NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION
    3× · 2021–2023 · $18k · revenue +37%

Funded once

  • NW
    NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • CENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC
    one grant, 2017 · $3k · revenue +10%
  • FC
    FELIDAE CONSERVATION FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue +281%
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
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
2
The Peregrine Fund Inc

To change the future for nature and humanity by conserving birds of prey worldwide.

—
3
Chile-California Council

The Chile-California Council is a San Francisco-based nonprofit dedicated to developing and promoting joint endeavors and cooperative relations between Chile and California, as well as individuals, legal entities and other institutions in…

International
4
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
5
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals Inc

Protection of animal rights

Animals
6
The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

The aspca's mission, as stated by founder henry bergh in 1866, is "to provide effective means for the prevention of cruelty to animals throughout the united states." the aspca was founded on the belief that animals are entitled to kind and…

Animals
7
Connectocean Conservation and Outreach Inc

Connectocean conservation and outreach is dedicated to fostering ocean stewardship and conserving aquatic ecosystems through community engagement, education, and collaborative conservation efforts. our mission is to connect communities to…

Human Services
8
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
9
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
10
Natural Resources Defense Council Inc

We safeguard the earth: its people, its plants and animals, and (see schedule o) the natural systems on which all life depends. we work to restore the integrity of the elements that sustain life - air, land, and water - to defend…

Environment
11
Project Drawdown

Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…

Education
12
Wildlife Alliance Inc

Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is North Valley Community Foundation; the most unlike its peers is National Wildlife Federation. 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

10 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. 10 of the 15 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)
10/10
Grantees still filing
7/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMPASS FAMILY SERVICES: $85,000 · Human ServicesCOMPASS FAMILY SERVICESInternational Rescue Committee INC: $56,500 · InternationalInternational Rescue Committee INCDIRECT RELIEF: $11,000 · InternationalDIRECT RELIEFIndividual grant recipient: $20,500 · OtherIndividual grant …NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $10,000 · OtherNATIONAL WILDLIFE…+3 more: $3,000 · Other+3 moreNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $18,000 · AnimalsNATIONAL WIL…FELIDAE CONSERVATION FUND: $3,000 · AnimalsFELIDAE CONS…Topanga Animal Rescue: $2,000 · AnimalsTopanga Anim…Humane World for Animals Inc: $1,000 · AnimalsPUT ME IN INC: $4,000 · Youth DevelopmentCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC: $3,000 · Public BenefitNORTH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $2,000 · Philanthropy
Human Services$85,000International$67,500Other$33,500Animals$24,000Youth Development$4,000Public Benefit$3,000Philanthropy$2,000

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 budgetCOMPASS FAMILY SERVICES: $85,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $56,500 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $18,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetDIRECT RELIEF: $11,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPUT ME IN INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetCENTER FOR POPULAR DEMOCRACY INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFELIDAE CONSERVATION FUND: $3,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetTopanga Animal Rescue: $2,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetHumane World for Animals Inc: $1,000 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The James a Folger and Jane C Folger Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The James a Folger and Jane C Folger Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The James a Folger and Jane C Folger Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The James a Folger and Jane C Folger 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.

    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 15 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on James a Folger and Jane C Folger’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