· Public charity
The Personal Care Products Council Inc
The personal care products council (pcpc) represents the cosmetics and personal care products industry.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 2 grants below total $16,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $99,966 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $83,966 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2023
- Under $10k1 grant · $6k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MADAM CJ WALKER INSTITUTE FOR WOMEN OF COLOR ENTREPRENEURS | $10,000 |
| CENTER FOR ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH AND EDUCATION | $6,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 81% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
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
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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +182% since the first grant, against +43% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2023, 4 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- MCMADAM CJ WALKER INSTITUTE FOR WOMEN ENTREPRENEURS OF COLOR3× · 2021–2023 · $30k · revenue +458% · 36% of their budget
- CICALIFORNIA ISSUES FORUM2× · 2019–2020 · $20k · revenue +6%
- WIWomen in California Leadership Inc2× · 2018–2020 · $20k · revenue +222%
Funded once
- COConference of Western Attorneys General AG Alliancegraduatedone grant, 2019 · $15k · revenue +77%
- NCNATIONAL CONFERENCE OF STATE LEGISLATURESone grant, 2018 · $12k
- CJCALIFORNIA JEWISH LEGISLATIVE CAUCUS LEADERSHIP FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +3%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
The council on criminal justice works to advance understanding of the criminal justice policy choices facing the nation and builds consensus for solutions that enhance safety and justice for all. Independent and nonpartisan, we are an…
The purpose of the organization is to provide objective, nonpartisan and balanced research analysis and commentary regarding legislation important to the California economy.
California women lead is dedicated to advancing the role of women at all levels of the public and private sectors by enhancing and strengthening women's leadership contributions through nonpartisan training, education programs and network…
The primary purpose of the organization is to examine and report on public policy issues related to Science and Technology that affect the State of California. CCST is a non-partisan, nonprofit organization that was established as an…
The League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan political organization, encourages informed and active participation in government, works to increase understanding of major public policy issues, and influences public policy through education and…
The mission of the california conference for women is to promote, communicate and amplify the influence of women in the workplace and beyond. at our annual nonprofit conferences, we bring together thousands of active professionals to…
(see overflow statement - part iii)
Represent members and cal employers to members of cal legislature and other agencies of state government through in-house legislative analysts, lobbying staff, and contract lobbyists. cal chamber publishes books and software related to…
Cfc advocates for the rights of california consumers on a broad range of consumer issues.
To educate women legislators
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ncsl Foundation for State Legislatures and the most unlike its peers is American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
17 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. 17 of the 18 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.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
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 MADAM CJ WALKER INSTITUTE FOR WOMEN ENTREPRENEURS OF COLOR ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA ISSUES FORUM ↗
- Who funds Women in California Leadership Inc ↗
- Who funds THE JAMES E MARSHALL OCD FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH AND EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds NCSL FOUNDATION FOR STATE LEGISLATURES ↗
- Who funds Conference of Western Attorneys General AG Alliance ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA JEWISH LEGISLATIVE CAUCUS LEADERSHIP FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR DERMATOLOGIC SURGERY ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATIVE BLACK CAUCUS POLICY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Independent Women's Forum ↗
- Who funds National Black Caucus of State Legislators ↗
- Who funds COUNCIL OF STATE GOVERNMENTS ↗
- Who funds Chamber of Commerce of the USA ↗
- Who funds ELEANOR ROOSEVELT CONFERENCE COMMITTEE INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL WOMEN'S HISTORY MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds Prevent Cancer Foundation aka Cancer Research & Prevention Fndn ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America · Ctia - the Wireless Association · Edison Electric Institute Inc · AARP · OpenRoad Foundation · California Association of Hospitals and Health Systems · American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers · Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund Inc · Nuclear Energy Institute Inc · The Pew Charitable Trusts · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Personal Care Products Council Inc 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.
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.