Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation Dossiers
Plinth

· Private foundation

The Keith and Cecilia Terasaki 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.

$739k
Granted FY2024still arriving
32
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$159k
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
0180% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.

Education$1.9MArts & Culture$782kHuman Services$639kHealth$408kEnvironment$83kCommunity Improvement$68kScience & Tech$17kAnimals$13kHousing & Shelter$10kOther$1.0M
02FY2024 · 32 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k14 grants · $49k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $219k
  • $50k–250k6 grants · $470k
$10,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$11M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UCLA DEVELOPMENT$158,750
LOS ANGELES PHILHARMONIC ASSOCIATIO$93,963
THE COLBURN SCHOOL$67,600
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$50,000
JWCH INSTITUTE INC$50,000
YMCA OF METROPOLITAN LOS ANGELES$50,000
BOSTON UNIVERSITY$30,000
NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY$25,000
TREE PEOPLE$25,000
VISTA DEL MAR CHILD FAMILY SERVICES$25,000
POSTON COMMUNITY ALLIANCE$25,000
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA$24,000
KIPP SOCAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS$15,000
BRENTWOOD SCHOOL$10,000
MARLBOROUGH SCHOOL$10,000
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 (FY17–24, $639k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%KIMOCHI INC: $25k → 10%KIMOCHI INC: $5k → 10%DOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER: $5k → 14%VISTA DEL MAR CHILD FAMILY SERVICES: $29k → 14%DOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER: $5k → 14%VISTA DEL MAR CHILD FAMILY SERVICES: $25k → 14%URBAN VOICES PROJECT: $5k → 14%VISTA DEL MAR CHILD FAMILY SERVICES: $25k → 14%VISTA DEL MAR CHILD FAMILY SERVICES: $25k → 14%URBAN VOICES PROJECT: $3k → 14%VISTA DEL MAR CHILD FAMILY SERVICES: $25k → 14%VISTA DEL MAR CHILD FAMILY SERVICES: $25k → 14%VISTA DEL MAR CHILD FAMILY SERVICES: $25k → 14%YMCA OF METROPOLITAN LOS ANGELES: $60k → 14%YMCA OF METROPOLITAN LOS ANGELES: $50k → 14%YMCA OF METROPOLITAN LOS ANGELES: $50k → 14%YMCA OF METROPOLITAN LOS ANGELES: $50k → 14%YMCA OF METROPOLITAN LOS ANGELES: $50k → 14%YMCA OF METROPOLITAN LOS ANGELES: $50k → 14%YMCA OF METROPOLITAN LOS ANGELES: $50k → 14%YMCA OF METROPOLITAN LOS ANGELES: $50k → 14%LANGE FOUNDATION: $500 → 14%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

WA
IL
NY
MA
WY
NJ
CA
VA
DC
HI

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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 8% of The Keith and Cecilia Terasaki Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 84% of the giving stays in CA; read by stated purpose it is 78% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

The Keith and Cecilia Terasaki Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$3.3M · 44 repeat orgs$114k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +31% since the first grant, against +28% for the ones you funded once.

44 repeat relationships — 25 still active in FY2024, 19 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

44
24

Total granted

$3.3M
$82k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+31%
+28%

Still filing today

80%
63%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $32k 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
Arts & CultureEducationHuman ServicesHealthAnimalsInternationalOther

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

  • TC
    THE COLBURN SCHOOL
    8× · 2017–2024 · $446k · revenue +90%
  • YM
    Young Men's Christian Association of Metropolitan Los Angeles
    8× · 2017–2024 · $410k · revenue +12%
  • JWCH INSTITUTE INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $367k · revenue +341%

Funded once

  • TI
    TERASAKI INSTITUTE BIOMEDICAL INNOV
    one grant, 2023 · $15k
  • HP
    HOLLENBECK PALMSgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +28%
  • TV
    THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTERgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +55%

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
California Institute of Contemporary Art
—
2
Association of California School Administrators

The association serves its members by creating resources that enable california school administrators to develop and apply creative leadership and management skills and in turn, improve the educational process for all students.

—
3
Academy of Television Arts and Sciences

The Television Academy is dedicated to celebrating excellence, innovation and the advancement of the telecommunications arts and sciences through recognition, education and leadership, while fostering a diverse, inclusive and accessible…

—
4
Los Angeles World Affairs Council and Town Hall

The organization is a non-partisan, membership based speakers' forum that connects business leaders, community members, and engaged individuals with shared interest in local, national, and global affairs. it provides an open and accessible…

International
5
Occidental College

See schedule othe mission of occidental college is to provide a gifted and diverse group of students with a total educational experience of the highest quality - one that prepares them for leadership in an increasingly complex,…

Education
6
Los Angeles Conservancy

The los angeles conservancy is a nonprofit membership organization that works through education and advocacy to recognize, preserve, and revitalize the historic architectural and cultural resources of los angeles county.

Arts & Culture
7
California College of the Arts

California college of the arts educates students to shape culture and society through the practice and critical study of art, architecture, design, and writing. benefitting from its san francisco bay area location, the college prepares…

Education
8
Los Angeles Opera Company

To serve the public by producing world-class opera that preserves, promotes and advances the art form while embodying the diversity, spirit and artistic sensibility unique to los angeles. we envision an engaged and enlightened community in…

Arts & Culture
9
Museum Associates

To serve the public through the collection, conservation, exhibition and interpretation of significant works of art from a broad range of cultures and historical periods, and through translation of these collections into meaningful…

Arts & Culture
10
Armand Hammer Museum of Art and Cultural Center Inc

The hammer museum at ucla believes in the promise of art and ideas to illuminate our lives and build a more just world.

Arts & Culture
11
California Academy of Sciences

The academy is a renowned scientific and educational institution with a mission to regenerate the natural world through science, learning, and collaboration. based in san francisco's golden gate park, it is home to a world-class aquarium,…

Arts & Culture
12
Boston Architectural College

The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Health4TheWorld. 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 backsteadyYouth Education & Support S…Asian American Cultural Org…Youth & Community Support S…Affordable Housing Developm…Dog Rescue and AdoptionPerforming Arts Organizatio…Regional Economic Developme…Family Philanthropic Founda…Community Health Centers
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 45 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number23%0%<5yr15%7%5–10yr19%9%10–20yr18%21%20–35yr12%26%35–55yr13%37%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value23%0%<5yr15%1%5–10yr19%3%10–20yr18%3%20–35yr12%26%35–55yr13%68%55yr+

The field is 23% 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 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
0.0%0/58
the rest of the field
14%
11,051/77,628

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.

05the grantee network

57 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. 57 of the 75 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
56/57
Grantees still filing
46/57
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

UCLA FOUNDATION — $1,099,255 · EducationUCLA FOUNDATIONUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA — $368,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIAMARLBOROUGH SCHOOL — $110,000 · EducationMARLBOROUGH SCHOOLBRENTWOOD SCHOOL — $105,000 · EducationBRENTWOOD SCHOOLNATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY — $87,966 · EducationKIPP SOCAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS — $70,000 · Education+6 more — $91,926 · EducationWEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE — $350,000 · OtherWEILL CORNELL MEDICAL C…CITY OF HOPE — $200,000 · OtherCITY OF HOPETRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY — $170,000 · OtherTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIV…THE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $80,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY+32 more — $242,211 · Other+32 moreTHE COLBURN SCHOOL — $445,975 · Arts & CultureTHE COLBURN SCHOO…LOS ANGELES PHILHARMONIC ASSOCIATION — $172,013 · Arts & CultureLOS ANGELES PHILH…AMERICAN CORPORATION OF THE ARTS — $35,762 · Arts & CultureDENSHO — $30,000 · Arts & Culture+10 more — $98,255 · Arts & Culture+10 moreYoung Men's Christian Association of Metropolitan Los Angeles — $410,260 · Human ServicesYoung Men's Ch…VISTA DEL MAR CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES — $179,400 · Human ServicesVISTA DEL MAR …KIMOCHI INC — $30,000 · Human Services+3 more — $18,850 · Human ServicesJWCH INSTITUTE INC — $366,800 · HealthJWCH INST…Health4TheWorld — $25,000 · HealthHealth4Th…+3 more — $16,500 · HealthTREEPEOPLE INC — $83,200 · Environment1979 LEGACY CORP — $68,440 · Community Improvement
Education$1,932,147Other$1,042,211Arts & Culture$782,005Human Services$638,510Health$408,300Environment$83,200Community Improvement$68,440

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetUCLA FOUNDATION — $1,099,255 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetTHE COLBURN SCHOOL — $445,975 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetYoung Men's Christian Association of Metropolitan Los Angeles — $410,260 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA — $368,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetJWCH INSTITUTE INC — $366,800 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetVISTA DEL MAR CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES — $179,400 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetLOS ANGELES PHILHARMONIC ASSOCIATION — $172,013 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetTRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY — $170,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetMARLBOROUGH SCHOOL — $110,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetBRENTWOOD SCHOOL — $105,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY — $87,966 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetTREEPEOPLE INC — $83,200 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY — $80,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetKIPP SOCAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS — $70,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budget1979 LEGACY CORP — $68,440 over 6y, 5.1% of budgetCROSSROADS SCHOOL FOR ARTS AND SCIENCES — $55,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN CORPORATION OF THE ARTS — $35,762 over 6y, 0.9% of budgetDENSHO — $30,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetKIMOCHI INC — $30,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetVENICE JAPANESE COMMUNITY CENTER INC — $27,500 over 2y, 4.8% of budgetPOSTON COMMUNITY ALLIANCE INC — $25,000 over 1y, 8.2% of budgetHealth4TheWorld — $25,000 over 2y, 30% of budgetLOS ANGELES COUNTY MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY FOUNDATION — $22,872 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetKIZUNA LITTLE TOKYO INC — $21,654 over 2y, 3.3% of budgetASIAN PACIFIC ALUMNI OF UCLA — $21,585 over 6y, 4.9% of budgetGALAPAGOS CONSERVANCY INC — $20,812 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetHEART MOUNTAIN WYOMING FOUNDATION — $15,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetGO FOR BROKE NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL CENTER — $14,500 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetDOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER — $10,350 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHOLLENBECK PALMS — $10,010 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER — $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRadiological Society of North America Inc — $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWESTSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOL — $9,083 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION FOR RESEARCH IN ASTRONOMY — $9,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF LA ANIMAL SHELTERS — $8,000 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetURBAN VOICES PROJECT — $8,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetGRIFFITH OBSERVATORY FOUNDATION — $7,869 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetSMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION — $7,368 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetCENTER THEATRE GROUP OF LOS ANGELES — $7,350 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetKAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSouthern California School Of Theology — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE LOS ANGELES DODGERS FOUNDATION — $4,369 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEAST-WEST PLAYERS INC — $3,100 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetACTION AGAINST HUNGER - USA — $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUS- JAPAN COUNCIL — $2,100 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetMONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION — $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPROJECT ANGEL FOOD — $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAQUARIUM OF THE PACIFIC CORPORATION — $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

  • Who funds UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE COLBURN SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds Young Men's Christian Association of Metropolitan Los Angeles ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
  • Who funds JWCH INSTITUTE INC ↗
  • Who funds VISTA DEL MAR CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds LOS ANGELES PHILHARMONIC ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds TRUSTEES OF BOSTON UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds MARLBOROUGH SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds BRENTWOOD SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds TREEPEOPLE INC ↗
  • Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds KIPP SOCAL PUBLIC SCHOOLS ↗
  • Who funds 1979 LEGACY CORP ↗
  • Who funds CROSSROADS SCHOOL FOR ARTS AND SCIENCES ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN CORPORATION OF THE ARTS ↗
  • Who funds DENSHO ↗
  • Who funds KIMOCHI INC ↗
  • Who funds VENICE JAPANESE COMMUNITY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds POSTON COMMUNITY ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds Health4TheWorld ↗
  • Who funds LOS ANGELES COUNTY MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds KIZUNA LITTLE TOKYO INC ↗
  • Who funds ASIAN PACIFIC ALUMNI OF UCLA ↗
  • Who funds GALAPAGOS CONSERVANCY INC ↗
  • Who funds HEART MOUNTAIN WYOMING FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds GO FOR BROKE NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds DOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER ↗
  • Who funds HOLLENBECK PALMS ↗
  • Who funds THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Radiological Society of North America Inc ↗
  • Who funds WESTSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOL ↗

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.

California Community …The Ralph M Parsons F…The Annenberg Foundat…Sempra FoundationThe Ahmanson Foundati…Terasaki Inst for Bio…The J Paul Getty TrustThe California Wellne…Terasaki Nibei Founda…Ja Community Foundati…Elbridge Stuart Found…Marin Community Found…
California Community FoundationCA28.1× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · The Annenberg Foundation · Sempra Foundation · The Ahmanson Foundation · Terasaki Inst for Biomedical Innovation · The J Paul Getty Trust · The California Wellness Foundation · Terasaki Nibei Foundation Fka Nibei Foundation · Ja Community Foundation · Elbridge Stuart Foundation Dba Stuart Foundation · Marin Community 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 Keith and Cecilia Terasaki 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 · 00%3%10%23%40%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 12%
  • Trustees of Boston University — 12% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
16report 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 Keith and Cecilia Terasaki Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Keith and Cecilia Terasaki 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 75 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 2024, released 2024. 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