· Private foundation
The Petit Teton 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SF PARKS ALLIANCE URBAN SPROUTS | $1,000 |
| AG INSTITUTE OF MARIN | $1,000 |
| OCCIDENTAL ARTS AND ECO CENTER | $1,000 |
| CAFF | $600 |
| MENDOCINO LAND TRUST | $600 |
| FRIENDS OF URBAN FOREST | $600 |
| EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE | $600 |
| RICHMOND DIST NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER | $600 |
| POINT BLUE STRAW PROG 11 | $600 |
| VALLEY VERDE | $600 |
| Individual grant recipient | $300 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those 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.
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.
24 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 19 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
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 FY2024, 45% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k 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
- OAOccidental Arts and Ecology Center8× · 2017–2024 · $11k · revenue +87%
- AIAGRICULTURAL INSTITUTE OF MARIN5× · 2018–2023 · $10k · revenue +153%
- RDRICHMOND DISTRICT NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER INC7× · 2017–2023 · $6k · revenue +185%
Funded once
- SFSAN FRANCISCO PARKS ALLIANCEone grant, 2022 · $3k · revenue -30%
- S(STRAW (Students Restoring a Watershedone grant, 2021 · $2k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $1k
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.
Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…
Protect, manage and preserve lands and wildlife having unique natural resources and cultural qualities within and near the foothills of the sierra nevada range.
Bay Nature connects the people of the San Francisco Bay Area to our natural world and motivates people to solve problems with nature in mind. Our vision is that all people have a close relationship with theirnatural world.
To cultivate a greener, healthier urban environment and a renewed sense of community by involving silicon valley residents in the understanding, planting, and care of the urban forest.
Create and publish educational materials, conduct professional development, promote awareness, and sponsor research on the spectacular biological diversity of the State of CA.
Our mission is to protect local nature and farmland to ensure a healthy environment for everyone.
The Wildlands Conservancy's dual mission is to preserve the beauty and biodiversity of the earth and to provide programs so that children may know the wonder and joy of nature.
The mission of the California Farmland Trust is to help farmers protect the best farmland in the world.
Land trust of santa cruz county (the organization) was incorporated in california as a not-for-profit corporation in 1978. the mission of the organization is to protect, care for, and connect all people to the vibrant natural and working…
Promote conservation easements and resource management plans that conserve agriculture lands, forestlands, wildlife habitat, open space, and other natural resources, in perpetuity.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is San Francisco Parks Alliance and the most unlike its peers is California Wildlife Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
22 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. 22 of the 42 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 Occidental Arts and Ecology Center ↗
- Who funds AGRICULTURAL INSTITUTE OF MARIN ↗
- Who funds RICHMOND DISTRICT NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Mendocino Land Trust ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA WILDLIFE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE URBAN FOREST ↗
- Who funds MENDOCINO WOODLANDS CAMP ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds SAN FRANCISCO PARKS ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY ALLIANCE WITH FAMILY FARMERS ↗
- Who funds GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds FORESTS FOREVER FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PROJECT AVARY INC ALTERNATIVE VENTURES FOR AT RISK YOUTH ↗
- Who funds AT THE CROSSROADS ↗
- Who funds PIE RANCH ↗
- Who funds Valley Verde ↗
- Who funds SLIDE RANCH ↗
- Who funds Earth Island Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds WEAVING EARTH INC ↗
- Who funds POINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY ↗
- Who funds BAY AREA FINANCIAL EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Anderson Valley Land Trust ↗
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: The San Francisco Foundation · Bothin Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Clif Family Foundation · McNabb Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Patagoniaorg · Community Foundation of Mendocino County · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Gordon E and Betty I Moore 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 Petit Teton 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.
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Petit Teton Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Petit Teton 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.