Skip to content
The Miner Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Miner Foundation

Its FY2017 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$7.5M
Granted FY2017
17
Grants FY2017
4
States reached
$6.7M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

90% of The Miner Foundation’s FY2017 grant dollars went to Schwab Charitable Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2017 names 13 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

01What it funds
01FY2017 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2017

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $190k
  • $50k–250k5 grants · $324k
  • $250k+2 grants · $7.0M
$40,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SCHWAB CHARITABLE FUND$6,717,943
THE BODY POSITIVE$250,000
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SONOMA VALLEY$100,000
SQUARE PEG FOUNDATION$74,400
MARIN AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST$50,000
HEIFER INTERNATIONAL$50,000
SUMMIT LAND CONSERVANCY$50,000
GLIDE FOUNDATION$45,000
CERES COMMUNITY PROJECT$40,000
CENTER FOR DOMESTIC PEACE$40,000
POMEROY RECREATION & REHABILITATION CENTER$20,000
HALLECK CREEK RANCH$15,000
HOMEWARD BOUND OF MARIN$10,000
HAND IN HAND OUTDOORS$10,000
BAY AREA WOMEN'S AND CHILDREN'S CENTER$10,000
02The need
02

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 (FY17–17, $120k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%CERES COMMUNITY PROJECT: $40k → 9%HAND IN HAND OUTDOORS: $10k → 8%BAY AREA WOMEN'S AND CHILDREN'S CENTER: $10k → 10%CENTER FOR DOMESTIC PEACE: $40k → 8%POMEROY RECREATION & REHABILITATION CENTER: $20k → 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 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
Bay Area Barns and Trails
Human Services
2
Marin Ventures

The mission of Marin Ventures is to serve adults with developmental disabilities by fostering independence, personal growth, and promoting the opportunity for community integration based upon individual need.Marin Ventures is an Adult…

Human Services
3
People with Disabilities Succeeding

Community support for Developmentally Disabled Adults, with a main emphasis on helping people to obtain and maintain real jobs in local businesses.

Employment
4
Sonoma Botanical Garden
—
5
Transportation Alternatives for Marin
Public Benefit
6
East Bay Agency for Children

For more than 70 years, East Bay Agency for Children continues to improve the well-being of children, youth and families by reducing the impact of trauma and social inequalities.

Health
7
Serra Residential Center Inc

To provide dignity, respect and choice for persons with developmental disabilities

—
8
Bay Area Outreach and Recreation Program

The Organization mission is to improve the health, independence, and social integration of people with physical disabilities through participation in sports, recreation and fitness programs.

—
9
Vivalon

Vivalon advances independence, health and quality of life for older adults and people with disabilities. Through a comprehensive, integrated program of active aging services, we provide specialized transportation, nutrition programs,…

Human Services
10
Sonoma Mountain Institute
Environment
11
Sutter Bay Hospitals

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
12
Council on Aging Services for Seniors

To enhance the quality of life for our aging community by providing services that promote wellbeing and maintain independence.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Halleck Creek Ranch; the most unlike its peers is The Body Positive. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

14 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. 14 of the 17 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
10/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $6,717,943 · PhilanthropyDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INCThe Body Positive: $250,000 · Food & NutritionMARIN AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST: $50,000 · Food & NutritionCenter for Domestic Peace: $40,000 · Human ServicesTHE CERES COMMUNITY PROJECT: $40,000 · Human ServicesPomeroy Recreation and Rehabilitation Center: $20,000 · Human ServicesBay Area Womens and Childrens Center: $10,000 · Human ServicesHAND IN HAND OUTDOORS: $10,000 · Human ServicesBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SONOMA VALLEY BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SONOMA VALLEY: $100,000 · Youth DevelopmentSQUARE PEG FOUNDATION: $74,400 · HealthHEIFER INTERNATIONAL: $50,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $7,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherGLIDE FOUNDATION: $45,000 · OtherHALLECK CREEK RANCH: $15,000 · OtherHomeward Bound of Marin: $10,000 · OtherSummit Land Conservancy: $50,000 · Environment
Philanthropy$6,717,943Food & Nutrition$300,000Human Services$120,000Youth Development$100,000Health$74,400Other$132,500Environment$50,000

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 budgetDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $6,717,943 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetThe Body Positive: $250,000 over 1y, 59% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SONOMA VALLEY BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF SONOMA VALLEY: $100,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetMARIN AGRICULTURAL LAND TRUST: $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetSummit Land Conservancy: $50,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetCenter for Domestic Peace: $40,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetTHE CERES COMMUNITY PROJECT: $40,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetPomeroy Recreation and Rehabilitation Center: $20,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHALLECK CREEK RANCH: $15,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetBay Area Womens and Childrens Center: $10,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetHomeward Bound of Marin: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHAND IN HAND OUTDOORS: $10,000 over 1y, 11% 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.

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.

Marin Community Found…McNabb FoundationSilicon Valley Commun…The Blackbaud Giving …Morgan Stanley Global…National Philanthropi…American Endowment Fo…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Vanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …
Marin Community FoundationCA19× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Marin Community Foundation · McNabb Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Miner Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Miner 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%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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.
    04Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to The Miner Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to The Miner 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 17 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 2017, released 2017. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Miner’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