Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Lossett Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$58k
Granted FY2024still arriving
10
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$15k
Largest
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$165kHealth$80kArts & Culture$58kYouth Development$56kEducation$17kRecreation & Sports$7kEnvironment$3kAnimals$2kOther$0
02FY2024 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k8 grants · $30k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $28k
$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$827k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
REDLANDS BOWL PERFORMING ARTS$15,000
MAKE A WISH$13,000
LOMA LINDA CHILDRENS HOSPITAL$5,000
YOUTH HOPE$5,000
FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF REDLANDS$5,000
ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF REDLANDS$5,000
FRIENDS OF CAROLINE PARK$4,000
PBS SOCAL$2,000
YMCA OF THE EAST VALLEY$2,000
AK SMILEY PUBLIC LIBRARY$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 (FY17–24, $114k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF REDLANDS: $10k → 14%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF REDLANDS: $10k → 14%FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF REDLANDS: $10k → 14%FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF REDLANDS: $10k → 14%FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF REDLANDS: $10k → 14%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF REDLANDS: $8k → 14%FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF REDLANDS: $6k → 14%FAMILY SERVICE ASSOCIATION OF REDLANDS: $5k → 14%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF REDLANDS: $5k → 14%ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF REDLANDS: $3k → 14%YMCA OF THE EAST VALLEY: $10k → 14%YMCA OF THE EAST VALLEY: $5k → 14%YMCA OF THE EAST VALLEY: $5k → 14%YMCA OF THE EAST VALLEY: $2k → 14%OPARC: $5k → 14%OPARC: $5k → 14%OPARC: $5k → 14%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.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$369k · 12 repeat orgs$26k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
9

Total granted

$369k
$24k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+58%
+74%

Still filing today

58%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
Human ServicesArts & CultureEnvironmentHealthOther
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

  • LL
    LOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION
    4× · 2017–2024 · $75k · revenue +8%
  • FS
    Family Service Association of Redlands
    5× · 2018–2024 · $41k · revenue +80%
  • YO
    YMCA of the East Valley
    4× · 2021–2024 · $22k · revenue +166%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $7k
  • IL
    Inspire Life Skills Training Incgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +294%
  • MO
    MUSEUM OF REDLANDS
    one grant, 2022 · $4k
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
Boys and Girls Club of the Redwoods

We empower youth to reach their full potential as repsonsible, caring and productive citizens through professionally led programs and activities that are fun, postive, and relevant, in a safe, supportive and healthy environment.

—
2
Redwood Coast Land Conservancy

To conserve lands for recreational, educational, ecological, agricultural, scenic & open space opportunities. We develop & maintain public access ways & trails to the ocean, rivers & other natural or scenic features along coastal Mendocino…

Environment
3
Redland Volunteer Fire Department

Volunteer fire and rescue

Public Safety & Disaster
4
Redwood Empire Council Boy Scouts of America No41

The Mission of the Boy Scouts of America is to prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law. The vision of the Boy Scouts of America is to prepare…

—
5
Redwood Community Services

Rcs's service mission is to empower communities for long term success. making connections since 1995, rcs has built a continuum of programs designed to ensure the best possible outcomes for our most vulnerable populations. from behavioral…

Human Services
6
Redlands Community Hospital

Our mission is to promote an environment where members of our community can receive high quality care and services so they can maintain and be restored to good health.

Health
7
Redlands Day Nursery

To provide quality early childhood education experiences and services for families in the greater redlands community, coupled with support for families as they develop parenting strategies, skills for independence and self-sufficiency.

Human Services
8
University of Redlands

We welcome, educate, and empower a diverse community of learners for lives of meaning, impact, and joy.

Education
9
Rivers & Lands Conservancy

Rivers & Lands Conservancy connects our community to natural, wild, and open spaces of Southern California through land conservation, stewardship and education.

Environment
10
Friends of Prospect Park

To provide for the perpetuation, beautification, development, and improvement of prospect park, a public park of the city of redlands, california and to encourage an appreciation and knowledge of the historical, cultural, and educational…

—
11
Northern California Regional Land Trust

The purpose of the organization is to monitor, manage, and preserve conservation easements it stewards in northern california. the organization acquires conservation easements in land exhibiting important natural features to protect and…

Environment
12
Redlands Police Community Foundation

The Redlands Police Community Foundation (RPCF)is a non-profit organization in the City of Redlands with the sole purpose of providing additional support to the Redlands Police Department. Its mission is to improve the quality of life for…

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Boys & Girls Clubs of Greater Redla Riverside; the most unlike its peers is Inspire Life Skills Training Inc. 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

12 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. 12 of the 22 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $75,000 · OtherLOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATIONMAKE A WISH: $50,500 · OtherMAKE A WISHREDLANDS BOWL PERFORMING ARTS: $50,000 · OtherREDLANDS BOWL PERFORMING ARTSYOUTH HOPE: $31,000 · OtherYOUTH HOPEBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER REDLA RIVERSIDE: $20,000 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER REDLA RIVERSIDEAK SMILEY PUBLIC LIBRARY: $17,000 · OtherAK SMILEY PUBLIC LIBRARY+7 more: $20,750 · Other+7 moreFamily Service Association of Redlands: $41,000 · Human ServicesFamily Service Association of Re…ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF REDLANDS: $36,000 · Human ServicesASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF REDLANDSYMCA of the East Valley: $22,000 · Human ServicesYMCA of the East ValleyOPARC: $15,000 · Human ServicesOPARCFRIENDS OF CAROLINE PARK: $6,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $1,000 · EnvironmentInspire Life Skills Training Inc: $5,000 · HealthREDLANDS ART ASSOCIATION: $2,000 · Arts & CultureREDLANDS CONSERVANCY: $2,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$264,250Human Services$114,000Environment$7,000Health$5,000Arts & Culture$4,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION: $75,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetFamily Service Association of Redlands: $41,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF REDLANDS: $36,000 over 5y, 2.2% of budgetYMCA of the East Valley: $22,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER REDLA RIVERSIDE: $20,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetOPARC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF CAROLINE PARK: $6,000 over 2y, 5.8% of budgetInspire Life Skills Training Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetREDLANDS ART ASSOCIATION: $2,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetREDLANDS CONSERVANCY: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGUIDE DOGS OF THE DESERT: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $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.

  • Who funds LOMA LINDA UNIVERSITY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Family Service Association of Redlands ↗
  • Who funds ASSISTANCE LEAGUE OF REDLANDS ↗
  • Who funds YMCA of the East Valley ↗
  • Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF GREATER REDLA RIVERSIDE ↗
  • Who funds OPARC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF CAROLINE PARK ↗
  • Who funds Inspire Life Skills Training Inc ↗
  • Who funds REDLANDS ART ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds REDLANDS CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds GUIDE DOGS OF THE DESERT ↗
  • Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗

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.

Inland Empire Community FoundationCA17.4× affinity6 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Inland Empire Community Foundation · Annette M Williams Charitable Foundation · Majestic Realty Foundation · Weingart Foundation · The Annenberg Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation 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 Lossett Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Lossett Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%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
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 22 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 Lossett Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph