· Public charity
The Richmond Ermet Aid Foundation
To contribute net proceeds from annual musical variety show to certain charitable organizations that provide services to aids patients,support hunger programs, programs for homeless,and under served youth in the san francisco bay area.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 47% of THE RICHMOND ERMET AID FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 10 grants below total $148,139 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $185,805 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $37,666 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 · FY2024
- Under $10k3 grants · $22k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $126k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| BROADWAY CARES | $27,472 |
| PROJECT OPEN HAND | $25,498 |
| CATHEDRAL CITY SENIOR CENTER | $20,300 |
| SAFE SCHOOL DESERT CITIES | $16,000 |
| THE BENT THEATER COMPANY | $15,674 |
| CHEEKY CHARITY | $11,020 |
| GUIDE DOGS OF THE DESERT | $10,500 |
| FIND FOOD BANK | $8,500 |
| PALM SPRINGS SYMPHONYl | $7,750 |
| THE L FUND | $5,425 |
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, $108k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 40% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
10 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 3 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, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $32k 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
- BCBROADWAY CARESEQUITY FIGHTS AIDS INC5× · 2017–2024 · $202k · revenue +25%
- MOMEALS ON WHEELS OF SAN FRANCISCO INC3× · 2017–2019 · $100k · revenue +44%
- POProject Open Hand5× · 2018–2024 · $96k · revenue +133%
Funded once
- RHRAPHAEL HOUSE OF SAN FRANCISCO INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $37k · revenue +67%
- TLTHE LGBTQ COMMUNITY CENTER OF THE Dgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $34k · revenue +71%
- DHDAP Health Incgraduatedone grant, 2022 · $30k · revenue +288%
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.
To provide services to seniors that promote independent living while maintaining their dignity and self-esteem.
The Spahr Center provides cultural, community, and health programs and direct services that celebrate and support Marin County, California's LGBTQ+ and HIV communities.
Openhouse enables San Francisco Bay Area LGBTQ+ seniors to overcome the unique challenges they face as they age by providing housing, direct services and community programs. (continued on Schedule O)
Our core belief at San Francisco Community Health Center is that everyone deserves to be healthy and needs access to the highest quality health care. Our mission is to transform lives by advancing health, wellness and equality.
To promote health, well-being, and social justice for those living with HIV, LGBTQ+ individuals, and communities marginalized by society.
Building a world where lgbt people thrive as healthy, equal and complete members of society. since its inception, the los angeles lgbt center (center) has been building a world where lgbt people thrive as healthy, equal and complete…
The san diego lgbt community center enhances and sustains the health & well-being of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, transgender, nonbinary, immigrant, and hiv communities to the betterment of our entire san diego region.
Aids project of the east bay (apeb) is focused on the prevention of the spread of hiv and supports individuals living with the virus through programs targeted at some of the most vulnerable and marginalized individuals. apeb seeks to…
San francisco aids foundation promotes health, wellness, and social justice for communities most impacted by hiv, through sexual health and substance use services, advocacy, and community partnerships.
The mission of the st. vincent de paul society of san francisco (svdp-sf) is to offer hope and service on a direct person-to-person basis, working to break the cycles of homelessness and domestic violence.
The mission of Westside Community Services is to provide high quality, family-centered, culturally competent behavioral health and human services for the residents of the city and county of San Francisco.
To assist people affected by or at risk for hiv/aids, substance abuse and mental health through culturally appropriate counseling, education, training, and advocacy, which results in more informed choices that maximize available benefits…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Meals On Wheels of San Francisco Inc and the most unlike its peers is Candid. 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 34 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 15% of your grantees by number, and just 6% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 15% 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.
20 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. 20 of the 23 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 BROADWAY CARESEQUITY FIGHTS AIDS INC ↗
- Who funds MEALS ON WHEELS OF SAN FRANCISCO INC ↗
- Who funds Project Open Hand ↗
- Who funds MEALS OF MARIN ↗
- Who funds CATHEDRAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds RAPHAEL HOUSE OF SAN FRANCISCO INC ↗
- Who funds THE LGBTQ COMMUNITY CENTER OF THE D ↗
- Who funds DAP Health Inc ↗
- Who funds Larkin Street Youth Services ↗
- Who funds AIDS LEGAL REFERRAL PANEL OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA ↗
- Who funds RAYROSE THEATRICALS INC ↗
- Who funds GUIDE DOGS OF THE DESERT ↗
- Who funds MIZELL CENTER ↗
- Who funds The LGBT Sanctuary Palm Springs Inc CO Oak Grove Center ↗
- Who funds Cheeky Charity Inc ↗
- Who funds SAFE SCHOOLS DESERT CITIES CORP ↗
- Who funds San Francisco Community Clinic Consortium ↗
- Who funds CANDID ↗
- Who funds Palm Springs Cultural Center ↗
- Who funds FOOD IN NEED OF DISTRIBUTION INC ↗
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 Grace Helen Spearman Foundation · Inland Empire Community Foundation · Regional Access Project Foundation · Bighorn Golf Club Charities Inc · Max & Victoria Dreyfus Foundation Inc · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
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 Richmond Ermet Aid 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 Richmond Ermet Aid Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Richmond Ermet Aid 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.