Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

The James and Rebecca Morgan Family Foundation

Its FY2021 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$33M
Granted FY2021
37
Grants FY2021
5
States reached
$13M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 50% of THE JAMES AND REBECCA MORGAN FAMILY FOUNDATION’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.

02FY2021 · 37 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2021

  • $10k–50k8 grants · $188k
  • $50k–250k21 grants · $1.9M
  • $250k+8 grants · $31M
$65,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FIDELITY CHARITABLE GIFT FUND (JM)$13,426,019
NATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST$12,176,019
NEW VENTURE FUND CLIMATE INTERACTIVE$2,200,000
FIDELITY CHARITABLE GIFT FUND$1,400,000
TEEN SUCCESS$650,000
CALIFORNIA FORWARD$450,000
CONFLUENCE PHILANTHROPY$400,000
PROJECT DRAWDOWN$400,000
GLOBAL CONSERVATION$200,000
SUSTAINABLE CONSERVATION$200,000
COMMUNITY INITIAT NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PRGRM$200,000
ACKNOWLEDGE ALLIANCE$150,000
POSITIVE COACHING ALLIANCE$150,000
HEALTHIER KIDS FOUNDATION$100,000
LOS ANGELES COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT$70,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–20, $91k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 99% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%WILD GIFT: $900 → 7%THE FAMILY PLACE: $100 → 14%CHILDREN NOW: $50k → 10%CHILDREN NOW: $40k → 10%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

ID
NY
MA
OR
PA
CA
VA
DC
TX

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

45%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$16M · 30 repeat orgs$19M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +37% since the first grant, against +32% for the ones you funded once.

30 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2021, 15 since wound down; 17 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

30
38

Total granted

$16M
$4.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+37%
+32%

Still filing today

87%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 25% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15M went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementEducationAnimalsHealthHuman ServicesOther

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

  • ST
    SHINE TOGETHER INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $2.0M · revenue +25%
  • PD
    PROJECT DRAWDOWN
    2× · 2020–2021 · $950k · revenue +46%
  • PC
    POSITIVE COACHING ALLIANCE
    5× · 2017–2021 · $900k · revenue +63%

Funded once

  • FC
    FIDELITY CHARITABLE DONOR ADVISED FUND
    one grant, 2020 · $2.2M
  • TN
    THE NATURE CONSERVANCY CALIFORNIA
    one grant, 2017 · $475k
  • SH
    SIERRA HEALTH FDN CNTR FOR HEALTH MGMT
    one grant, 2020 · $450k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
2
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
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
Nature and Culture International

Nature and culture international conserves biologically diverse landscapes in latin america, in concert with local cultures, for the well-being of the planet.

Environment
5
California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance

California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.

Environment
6
The Sierra Fund

The Sierra Fund (TSF) is a non-profit organization with a mission to restore ecosystem and community resiliency in the Sierra Nevada.

Environment
7
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
8
California Institute for Biodiversity

Create and publish educational materials, conduct professional development, promote awareness, and sponsor research on the spectacular biological diversity of the State of CA.

Education
9
Green Foothills Foundation dba Green Foothills

Our mission is to protect local nature and farmland to ensure a healthy environment for everyone.

—
10
San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory

The San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory is dedicated to the conservation of birds and their habitats through science and outreach.

Environment
11
Wildlife Conservation Network Inc

Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.

Animals
12
California Farmland Trust

The mission of the California Farmland Trust is to help farmers protect the best farmland in the world.

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for Excellence in Nonprofits and the most unlike its peers is Bring Me a Book Foundation. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteady#20#7#16#17#11#10#19#18
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 30 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number22%0%<5yr14%3%5–10yr19%18%10–20yr16%43%20–35yr13%18%35–55yr16%17%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value22%0%<5yr14%0%5–10yr19%18%10–20yr16%63%20–35yr13%8%35–55yr16%10%55yr+

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/66
the rest of the field
13%
240,396/1,819,499

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.

04the grantee network

65 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. 65 of the 92 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
16
Early backer (in before they grew)
65/65
Grantees still filing
47/65
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

FIDELITY CHARITABLE GIFT FUND (JM) — $13,426,019 · OtherFIDELITY CHARITABLE GIFT FUND (JM)NEW VENTURE FUND CLIMATE INTERACTIVE — $4,208,000 · OtherNEW VENTURE FUND CLIMATE INTERACTIVEFIDELITY CHARITABLE DONOR ADVISED FUND — $2,185,742 · OtherFIDELITY CHARITABLE DONOR ADVISED FUNDTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $1,885,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY+52 more — $5,679,200 · Other+52 moreNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST — $12,176,019 · PhilanthropyNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST+5 more — $848,000 · Philanthropy+5 morePROJECT DRAWDOWN — $950,000 · EducationPOSITIVE COACHING ALLIANCE — $900,000 · EducationTeach for America Inc — $400,000 · EducationNEW TEACHER CENTER — $125,000 · EducationPRESIDENT-BOARD OF TRUSTEES SANTA CLARA COLLEGE — $125,000 · Education+2 more — $55,250 · EducationGLOBAL CONSERVATION — $825,000 · EnvironmentSustainable Conservation — $550,000 · EnvironmentFEATHER RIVER LAND TRUST — $550,000 · EnvironmentEnvironmental Volunteers Inc — $183,000 · EnvironmentTRUST FOR HIDDEN VILLA — $86,814 · Environment+9 more — $321,750 · EnvironmentSHINE TOGETHER INC — $2,050,000 · Youth DevelopmentFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND — $1,400,000 · Community ImprovementVALLEY VISION — $112,000 · Community ImprovementSan Juan Education Foundation — $90,000 · Community ImprovementSAN DIEGO REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION — $70,000 · Community Improvement+3 more — $95,000 · Community ImprovementCALIFORNIA FORWARD — $1,350,000 · Public Benefit
Other$27,383,961Philanthropy$13,024,019Education$2,555,250Environment$2,516,564Youth Development$2,050,000Community Improvement$1,767,000Public Benefit$1,350,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetNATIONAL PHILANTHROPIC TRUST — $12,176,019 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSHINE TOGETHER INC — $2,050,000 over 5y, 23% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $1,885,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND — $1,400,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA FORWARD — $1,350,000 over 3y, 23% of budgetPROJECT DRAWDOWN — $950,000 over 2y, 9.7% of budgetPOSITIVE COACHING ALLIANCE — $900,000 over 5y, 2.8% of budgetHEALTHIER KIDS FOUNDATION — $850,000 over 5y, 7.9% of budgetGLOBAL CONSERVATION — $825,000 over 4y, 16% of budgetSustainable Conservation — $550,000 over 3y, 6.6% of budgetFEATHER RIVER LAND TRUST — $550,000 over 5y, 10% of budgetACKNOWLEDGE ALLIANCE — $450,000 over 3y, 14% of budgetCONFLUENCE PHILANTHROPY INC — $400,000 over 1y, 15% of budgetTeach for America Inc — $400,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetRAINFOREST TRUST — $275,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetTHE STUDENT CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION INC — $250,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetSacramento Region Community Foundation — $223,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetWildlife Conservation Society — $200,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY SCHOOL OF MUSIC AND ARTS — $200,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetEnvironmental Volunteers Inc — $183,000 over 3y, 8.8% of budgetSan Jose Grail Family Services — $170,000 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetBRING ME A BOOK FOUNDATION — $150,000 over 4y, 21% of budgetNORTH VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION — $145,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetNEW TEACHER CENTER — $125,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetPRESIDENT-BOARD OF TRUSTEES SANTA CLARA COLLEGE — $125,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetVALLEY VISION — $112,000 over 3y, 2.1% of budgetORANG UTAN REPUBLIK FOUNDATION INC — $100,000 over 1y, 25% of budgetINTERNATIONAL ELEPHANT FOUNDATION — $100,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetSan Juan Education Foundation — $90,000 over 5y, 12% of budgetCHILDREN NOW — $90,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetOneReef Worldwide Stewardship — $90,000 over 2y, 8.5% of budgetTRUST FOR HIDDEN VILLA — $86,814 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetSAN DIEGO REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION — $70,000 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetBAY AREA COUNCIL — $65,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetINLAND EMPIRE ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP INC — $65,000 over 1y, 3.8% of budgetCentral Valley Community Foundation A Corporation — $65,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetVIDA VERDE NATURE EDUCATION — $55,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetCENTER FOR EXCELLENCE IN NONPROFITS — $50,000 over 1y, 4.4% of budgetPIE RANCH — $50,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetTen Strands — $50,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC — $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR A COLLEGE EDUCATION — $50,000 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetGRASSROOTS ECOLOGY — $50,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetVEGGIELUTION — $40,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL FOUNDATION — $35,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMarine Science Institute — $35,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetCanopy — $30,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetTRUCKEE DONNER LAND TRUST — $26,750 over 2y, 0.3% of budget
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.

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.

The David and Lucile …Silicon Valley Commun…Gordon E and Betty I …Sand Hill FoundationThe Sobrato Family Fo…Philanthropic Venture…Jewish Community Fede…Los Altos Mountain Vi…The Applied Materials…The Palo Alto Communi…Atkinson FoundationThe James and Rebecca…
The David and Lucile Packard FoundationCA49.3× affinity24 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · Sand Hill Foundation · The Sobrato Family Foundation · Philanthropic Ventures Foundation · Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Los Altos Mountain View Community Foundation · The Applied Materials Foundation · The Palo Alto Community Fund · Atkinson Foundation · The James and Rebecca Morgan Charitable Foundation

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 James and Rebecca Morgan Family Foundation 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%2%6%14%25%your 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
    23report 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

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The James and Rebecca Morgan Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The James and Rebecca Morgan Family 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 92 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines