· Private foundation
The Scott and Tara Roseman Foundation
Its FY2025 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k3 grants · $13k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $80k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $153k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UC BERKELEY FOUNDATION | $100,000 |
| SUBLETTE COUNTY HEALTH FOUNDATION | $53,463 |
| FISHING FOR THE FIGHT | $45,000 |
| BAYSIDE CHURCH | $25,000 |
| JAE FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| CANCER FOUNDATION OF SANTA BARBARA | $5,000 |
| COWPOKE FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| ARIZONA CUTTING HORSE ASSOCIATION | $3,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY23–24, $17k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 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.
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 +42% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 2 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, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $63k 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
- FFFISHING FOR THE FIGHT2× · 2024–2025 · $72k · revenue +42%
- FTFISHING THE GOOD FIGHT INC2× · 2022–2023 · $48k · revenue +245%
- ACArizona Cutting Horse Association2× · 2021–2025 · $11k · revenue +11%
Funded once
- CACAL ATHLETICS FUNDone grant, 2022 · $100k
- SASALVATION ARMY ROSEVILLE CORPSone grant, 2017 · $11k
- MCMikuni Charitable Organizationone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue 0%
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.
Foster amateur equestrian sports competition; confer achievement awards to various direct participants in equestrian sports competition; educate the public in proper methods & techniques of horsemanship; provide a forum & voice for…
To help develop veterinarians and fund research in Thoroughbred equine care and breeding within California.
Educate the public on, and support the heritage and promotion of, the Clovis rodeo; provide student scholarships and resources for education in the areas of agriculture, livestock, and rodeo; provide resources for the enhancement and…
It is the foundation's mission to further the purposes and objectives of california waterfowl association (cwa), a california corporation exempt from income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the internal revenue code.
Assist the california state fair and other agricultural ventures in the state of california in bettering the agricultural assets in the state.
Promote ag education with university scholarships.
At California Transportation Foundation (CTF) our mission is simple. We recognize the best and brightest in our industry with our Annual CTF Transportation Awards program. We remember those who have given all in service to the people of…
The mission of the California Farmland Trust is to help farmers protect the best farmland in the world.
California trout was established in 1971 for the purpose of undertaking programs and activities to conserve and enhance the wild trout and their natural habitat within california. additionally, california trout gathers funds to finance…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is California Rangeland Trust and the most unlike its peers is Blood Cancer United Inc. 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 23 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 14% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% 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.
21 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. 21 of the 39 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 FISHING FOR THE FIGHT ↗
- Who funds SUBLETTE COUNTY HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FISHING THE GOOD FIGHT INC ↗
- Who funds PCCH Youth Fund ↗
- Who funds WEST COAST EQUINE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Cowpoke Foundation ↗
- Who funds Arizona Cutting Horse Association ↗
- Who funds CANCER FOUNDATION OF SANTA BARBARA ↗
- Who funds Mikuni Charitable Organization ↗
- Who funds CALVIN CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Friends of Raymond James Inc ↗
- Who funds Jae Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds THE FOUNDATION FOR THE HORSE FKA THE AAEP FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds PLACER COUNTY FAIR ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Loomis Basin Charter School PTC ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA RANGELAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds CANYON STATE ACADEMY INC ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA WATERFOWL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA WILDLIFE OFFICERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SAN JOAQUIN JUNIOR SHOW AND AUCTION COUNCIL ↗
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: Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Network for Good · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Scott and Tara Roseman 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 Scott and Tara Roseman Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Scott and Tara Roseman 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.