Skip to content
The James and Barbara Knuppe Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The James and Barbara Knuppe Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$425k
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$180k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Human Services$1.7MReligion$1.2MEducation$730kHealth$571kInternational$42kFood & Nutrition$37kHousing & Shelter$11kArts & Culture$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k3 grants · $11k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $234k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $180k
$24,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$273k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$180,000
PASTOR WILLIE ROLAND PEOPLE OF CHRI$42,000
Individual grant recipient$36,000
FLOW LOVES YOU FOUNDATION$36,000
CRU$30,000
KNUPPE MOLECULAR UROLOGY LAB UCSF$24,000
UC REGENTS UCSF MEDICAL CENTER$24,000
CALIFORNIA BAPTIST COLLEGE$18,000
CAMPUS OUTREACH$12,000
ELIM EVANGELISTIC CHURCH$12,000
LETS GO FISHING$5,000
ENDURING FREEDOM FOUNDATION$4,390
GIRLS TOWN JERUSALEM$1,200
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 27% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%DISTRICT 5170 FOUNDATION: $25k → 6%SYMPHONY OF HOPE: $170k → 9%CALIFORNIA BAPTIST COLLEGE: $128k → 11%PASTOR WILLIE ROLAND PEOPLE OF CHRI: $42k → 12%BIOLA UNIVERSITY: $37k → 14%CRU: $30k → 13%WESTERN SEMINARY: $21k → 12%UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA: $27k → 13%SOUTH HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH: $24k → 13%SYMPHONY OF HOPE: $25k → 9%CALIFORNIA BAPTIST COLLEGE: $84k → 11%PASTOR WILLIE ROLAND PEOPLE OF CHRI: $31k → 12%BIOLA UNIVERSITY: $22k → 14%CRU: $30k → 13%TYLER AND LAUREN AAGARD: $27k → 13%SOUTH HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH: $24k → 13%SEQUOYAH COUNSELING: $180k → 10%CALIFORNIA BAPTIST COLLEGE: $43k → 11%PASTOR WILLIE ROLAND PEOPLE OF CHRI: $30k → 12%CRU: $30k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA: $26k → 13%SOUTH HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH: $24k → 13%SEQUOYAH COUNSELING: $180k → 10%CALIFORNIA BAPTIST COLLEGE: $33k → 11%PASTOR WILLIE ROLAND PEOPLE OF CHRI: $30k → 12%CRU: $30k → 13%UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA: $25k → 13%SOUTH HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH: $24k → 13%SEQUOYAH COUNSELING: $180k → 10%CALIFORNIA BAPTIST COLLEGE: $32k → 11%PASTOR WILLIE ROLAND PEOPLE OF CHRI: $30k → 12%CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY LONG BE: $26k → 14%CRU: $30k → 13%SOUTH HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH: $24k → 13%SEQUOYAH COUNSELING: $180k → 10%CALIFORNIA BAPTIST COLLEGE: $24k → 11%CRU: $30k → 13%SOUTH HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH: $24k → 13%SEQUOYAH COUNSELING: $180k → 10%CALIFORNIA BAPTIST COLLEGE: $18k → 11%CRU: $30k → 13%SEQUOYAH COUNSELING: $180k → 10%CRU: $30k → 13%SEQUOYAH COUNSELING: $180k → 10%SEQUOYAH COUNSELING: $180k → 10%REDWOOD CHAPEL COMMUNITY CHURCH: $73k → 10%360 SERVE: $42k → 10%PASTOR JOSHUA AKALI: $36k → 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

NY
OR
NV
CA
CO
NC
HI
AL
FL
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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$4.4M · 27 repeat orgs$113k to everyone else

27 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2024, 15 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

27
7

Total granted

$4.4M
$108k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+24%
+50%

Still filing today

19%
14%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EducationHuman ServicesInternationalOther
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

  • FF
    Flowlovesyou Foundation
    7× · 2018–2024 · $252k · revenue +59% · 35% of their budget
  • BU
    BIOLA UNIVERSITY INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $58k · revenue +15%
  • ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK
    3× · 2017–2019 · $37k · revenue +87%

Funded once

  • 3
    360Servegraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $42k · revenue +50%
  • D5
    DISTRICT 5170 FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • FL
    FLOW LOVE YOU FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2017 · $18k
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
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 35 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
5/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Individual grant recipient: $1,440,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCALIFORNIA BAPTIST COLLEGE: $380,186 · OtherCALIFORNIA BAPTIST COLLEGEUC REGENTS UCSF MEDICAL CENTER: $330,124 · OtherUC REGENTS UCSF MEDICAL CENTERCRU: $240,000 · OtherCRUELIM EVANGELISTIC CHURCH: $229,023 · OtherELIM EVANGELISTIC CHURCHKNUPPE MOLECULAR UROLOGY LAB UCSF: $216,000 · OtherPASTOR WILLIE ROLAND PEOPLE OF CHRI: $198,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $195,806 · OtherREDWOOD CHAPEL COMMUNITY CHURCH: $150,000 · OtherSOUTH HILLS COMMUNITY CHURCH: $148,000 · Other+21 more: $606,381 · Other+21 moreFlowlovesyou Foundation: $252,000 · Human ServicesBIOLA UNIVERSITY INC: $58,342 · Education+1 more: $1,100 · Education360Serve: $42,400 · International
Other$4,134,020Human Services$252,000Education$59,442International$42,400

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 budgetFlowlovesyou Foundation: $252,000 over 7y, 35% of budgetBIOLA UNIVERSITY INC: $58,342 over 2y, 0.0% of budget360Serve: $42,400 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $37,100 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBL GIRLS TOWN JERUSALEM INC: $11,300 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetREDWOOD CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS: $1,100 over 2y, 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.

  • Who funds Flowlovesyou Foundation ↗
  • Who funds BIOLA UNIVERSITY INC ↗
  • Who funds 360Serve ↗
  • Who funds ALAMEDA COUNTY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds BL GIRLS TOWN JERUSALEM INC ↗
  • Who funds REDWOOD CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS ↗

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.

Natl Christian Charit…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA7.7× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 James and Barbara Knuppe Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The James and Barbara Knuppe Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 35 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on James and Barbara Knuppe Family’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