· Private foundation
The Sharon D Lund 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.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k14 grants · $435k
- $50k–250k34 grants · $3.1M
- $250k+7 grants · $3.3M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OLIVE CREST | $625,000 |
| CHOC CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION | $537,000 |
| CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $523,000 |
| CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL LA | $500,000 |
| VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA - LA | $450,000 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CENTRAL OC | $325,000 |
| THE FROSTIG CENTER | $300,000 |
| RYMAN ARTS | $225,000 |
| RADY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION | $200,000 |
| CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF THE ARTS | $200,000 |
| ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $200,000 |
| GIVE KIDS THE WORLD | $200,000 |
| SAVE THE FAMILY | $150,000 |
| GUIDE DOGS OF DESERT | $125,000 |
| FREE WHEELCHAIR MISSION | $110,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $2.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 65% 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 +27% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
68 repeat relationships — 49 still active in FY2024, 19 since wound down; 4 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, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $180k 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
- CFCHOC FOUNDATION8× · 2017–2024 · $6.5M · revenue +103%
- CHChildren's Hospital Los Angeles7× · 2017–2024 · $3.5M · revenue +78%
- MFMARIANNE FROSTIG CTR OF EDU THERAPY8× · 2017–2024 · $2.8M · revenue +79%
Funded once
- PIPHILANTHROPIC IMPACT FUNDone grant, 2021 · $500k · revenue 0%
- HHOMEAIDone grant, 2017 · $150k
COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INCone grant, 2022 · $50k · revenue -6%
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 distribute public affairs and other educational information in order to create an electronic bridge between californians and their public officials, and, in the process educate a new generation of voting citizens and civic leaders who…
The association serves its members by creating resources that enable california school administrators to develop and apply creative leadership and management skills and in turn, improve the educational process for all students.
Cca is committed to preparing young children to be global citizens who are developmentally well-rounded, emotionally literate, and environmentally conscious.
The mission of children's home society of california is to provide children, families, and communities with supportive services to thrive.
The primary exempt purpose of children's healthcare of california includes without limitation the receipt of distributions and grants for the making of distributions and grants to children's hospital of orange county (choc) and to…
The california dental association is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.
To transform lives and communities by providing an array of programs, all directed toward changing the lives of children in the foster care system aimed to prevent academic failure, drug abuse, teen pregnancy, sex trafficking,…
California college of the arts educates students to shape culture and society through the practice and critical study of art, architecture, design, and writing. benefitting from its san francisco bay area location, the college prepares…
Children's law center of california (clc) provides legal representation for children and youth impacted by abuse and neglect. we advocate for our clients by supporting families; fighting for reunification, permanence, educational…
To deliver oral health education and comprehensive treatment for economically disadvantaged children, including those with complex medical considerations, while also providing premier training in pediatric and multi-specialty dentistry.
Guided by the principles of academic rigor and diversity, the international school of san francisco offers programs of study in french and english to prepare its graduates for a world in which the ability to think critically and to…
The foundation's mission is to improve the oral health of all californians by supporting the dental profession and its efforts to meet community needs.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Olive Crest and the most unlike its peers is Humane World for Animals International. 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 41 years old; the field is 12. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 26% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 16% 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.
49 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. 49 of the 82 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 CHOC FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Children's Hospital Los Angeles ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MARIANNE FROSTIG CTR OF EDU THERAPY ↗
- Who funds ORANGE COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RIVERVIEW SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds THE RYMAN-CARROLL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF THE ARTS ↗
- Who funds DR SUSAN LOVE RESEARCH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RADY CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL FOUNDATION SAN DIEGO ↗
- Who funds LEARNING WITH A DIFFERENCE INC ↗
- Who funds GIVE KIDS THE WORLD INC ↗
- Who funds OLIVE CREST ↗
- Who funds Segerstrom Center for the Arts ↗
- Who funds Phoenix Children's Hospital ↗
- Who funds OPERATION SMILE INC ↗
- Who funds FREE WHEELCHAIR MISSION ↗
- Who funds CHILDHELP INC ↗
- Who funds THE SHEEPFOLD INC ↗
- Who funds THE YOUNG AMERICANS INC ↗
- Who funds PHILANTHROPIC IMPACT FUND ↗
- Who funds International Guiding Eyes Inc DBA Guide Dogs of America ↗
- Who funds JOHN TRACY CLINIC ↗
- Who funds THE WOODEN FLOOR FOR YOUTH MOVEMENT ↗
- Who funds A PLACE CALLED HOME ↗
- Who funds FOSTERALL ↗
- Who funds FRIENDLY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds CANINE COMPANIONS FOR INDEPENDENCE INC ↗
- Who funds EXCEPTIONAL MINDS ↗
- Who funds Share Our Selves Corporation ↗
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 · Orange County Community Foundation · The Ahmanson Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · The Rose Hills Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · Carl E Wynn Foundation · Audrey & Sydney Irmas Charitable Foundation · Thomas & Dorothy Leavey Foundation · The Devto Support Foundation · Carrie Estelle Doheny Foundation · Argyros Family 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 Sharon D Lund 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.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Best Buddies International Inc — 4% of income from government
- Riverview School Inc — 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 Sharon D Lund Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Sharon D Lund 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.