· Public charity
The Rose and David Dortort Foundation
Supporting organization of california community foundation.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 35 grants below total $535,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $575,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $40,000 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 · FY2025
- Under $10k4 grants · $20k
- $10k–50k31 grants · $515k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION | $45,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES | $30,000 |
| WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK | $30,000 |
| COMMUNITY ALLIANCE FOR LEARNING | $25,000 |
| ARHOOLIE FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| ARHOOLIE FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE INC | $25,000 |
| AUTRY MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN WEST | $25,000 |
| HILLEL THE FOUNDATION FOR JEWISH CAMPUS LIFE | $25,000 |
| FOUNDATION FOR CITY COLLEGE | $25,000 |
| CALIFORNIA ADVOCATES FOR NURSING HOME REFORM | $25,000 |
| MADAGASCAR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH | $20,000 |
| CENTRO LEGAL DE LA RAZA | $10,000 |
| 826 VALENCIA | $10,000 |
| SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE | $10,000 |
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 68% 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.
50 repeat relationships — 31 still active in FY2025, 19 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $45k 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
- HAHILLEL AT UCLA9× · 2017–2025 · $210k · revenue +108%
PLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES6× · 2019–2025 · $200k · revenue +71%- WCWILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC8× · 2017–2025 · $195k · revenue +302%
Funded once
- TATHE AUTHORS GUILD FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +104%
POPULATION CONNECTIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +97%- CFCHELSEA'S FUNDone grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue -29%
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 union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.
Alaska Whale Foundation is dedicated to marine mammal conservation through research monitoring and education.
The aquarium of the pacific's mission is to instill a sense of wonder, respect, and stewardship for the pacific ocean, its inhabitants, and ecosystems.
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
To improve the efficacy, speed, cost, sustainability, and scaling of conservation solutions through harnessing exponential technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship to prevent human-induced extinction.
The institute for bird populations enables science-based conservation of species and habitats by studying the abundance, demography, and ecology of birds and other wildlife.
The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is African Parks Foundation of America and the most unlike its peers is Montgomery Botanical Center. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 31 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
60 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. 60 of the 61 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 HILLEL AT UCLA ↗
- Who funds AUTRY MUSEUM OF THE AMERICAN WEST ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds Earth Island Institute Inc ↗
- Who funds THE CITY COLLEGE FUND ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY ALLIANCE FOR LEARNING DBA WRITERCOACH CONNECTION ↗
- Who funds California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform ↗
- Who funds Arhoolie Foundation ↗
- Who funds SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds THE FOUNDATION FOR CITY COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds MADAGASCAR HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INC ↗
- Who funds THE AUTHORS LEAGUE FUND EST BY THE AUTHORS LEAGUE OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds 826 Valencia ↗
- Who funds THE MARINE MAMMAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds THE JONSSON CANCER CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds XERCES SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds CENTRO LEGAL DE LA RAZA ↗
- Who funds THE CORAL REEF ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds ORCHID CONSERVATION ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds Trust Women Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN SOCIETY OF JOURNALISTS AND AUTHORS CHARITABLE TRUST ↗
- Who funds PHYSICIAN SCIENTIST SUPPORT FOUNDAT ↗
- Who funds National Domestic Workers Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds SEACOLOGY ↗
- Who funds WRITERS GUILD FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds 826LA ↗
- Who funds RESTAURANT WORKERS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds RAINFOREST TRUST ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Shaking the Tree Inc ↗
- Who funds INSTITUTO DE EDUCACION POPULAR DEL SUR DE CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds ONE TREE PLANTED INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL DAY LABORER ORGANIZING NETWORK ↗
- Who funds HEMOPET ↗
- Who funds United States Artists Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN SOCIETY OF JOURNALIST AND AUTHORS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AFRICAN PARKS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA ↗
- Who funds West Alabama Womens Center 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: California Community Foundation · Marin Community Foundation · Liberty Hill Foundation · The Annenberg Foundation · The Sheila Dave & Sherry Gold Foundation CO Jeff Gold · The Shubert Foundation Inc · Clif Family Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust 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 Rose and David Dortort 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.
- Center for Coastal Studies Inc — 26% of income from government
- Xerces Society Inc — 22% of income from government
- Montgomery Botanical Center — 0% of income from government
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 Rose and David Dortort Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Rose and David Dortort 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.