· Private foundation
The Skyscrape Foundation Formerly the Marie D Jeffrey 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 $10k41 grants · $63k
- $10k–50k11 grants · $181k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| IF NOT US THEN WHO | $25,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $21,000 |
| CONSERVATION ACTION RESEARCH NETWORK | $21,000 |
| KCRW | $20,000 |
| WILD CLASSROOM PROJECT | $20,000 |
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN | $15,000 |
| LA MAS | $15,000 |
| EARTHWATCH INSTITUTE | $13,538 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,200 |
| DANCER'S GROUP | $10,000 |
| MONGABAYORG | $10,000 |
| JOSHUA TREE FOUNDATION ARTS & ECOLOGY | $5,300 |
| GET LIT | $5,250 |
| CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY | $5,250 |
| NAPA VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
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, $18k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 83% 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 6% of The Skyscrape Foundation Formerly the Marie D Jeffrey Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
64 repeat relationships — 31 still active in FY2025, 33 since wound down; 18 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, 68% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $76k 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
- MOMONGABAY ORG CORP9× · 2017–2025 · $190k · revenue +396%
COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC4× · 2017–2023 · $80k · revenue +36%- CNCalifornia Native Plant Society6× · 2019–2025 · $59k · revenue +168%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $54k
- CICalifornia Institute for Biodiversityone grant, 2024 · $50k · revenue +19%
- VEVarious entitiesone grant, 2017 · $28k
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.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
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.
The Chile-California Council is a San Francisco-based nonprofit dedicated to developing and promoting joint endeavors and cooperative relations between Chile and California, as well as individuals, legal entities and other institutions in…
Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Foundation of the Napa Valley and the most unlike its peers is The Laundry Truck La. 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 33 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) — 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 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.
93 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. 93 of the 163 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 CONSERVATION ACTION RESEARCH NETWORK ↗
- Who funds MONGABAY ORG CORP ↗
- Who funds UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COOPERATIVE FOR ASSISTANCE AND RELIEF EVERYWHERE INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF THE NAPA VALLEY ↗
- Who funds EARTHWATCH INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds California Native Plant Society ↗
- Who funds California Institute for Biodiversity ↗
- Who funds LA-MAS INC ↗
- Who funds Massachusetts Institute of Technology ↗
- Who funds FRACTURED ATLAS INC ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC COUNCIL ON INTERNATIONAL POLICY ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds If Not Us Then Who ↗
- Who funds PHYSICIANS FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ↗
- Who funds CROSSROADS SCHOOL FOR ARTS AND SCIENCES ↗
- Who funds CORPORATION OF THE FINE ARTS MUSEUMS ↗
- Who funds WOMEN MAKE MOVIES INC ↗
- Who funds HALFTHESTORY ↗
- Who funds OLE HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GLEN CANYON INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds RED LETTER CHRISTIANS ↗
- Who funds KQED INC ↗
- Who funds MOUNTAINS RESTORATION TRUST ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
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: Marin Community Foundation · Community Foundation of the Napa Valley · Tides Foundation · California Community Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · Tecumseh Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Craig and Kathryn Hall Foundation · Clif Family Foundation · McNabb Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Annenberg 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 Skyscrape Foundation Formerly the Marie D Jeffrey 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.
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology — 35% of income from government
- Oxfam-America 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 Skyscrape Foundation Formerly the Marie D Jeffrey Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Skyscrape Foundation Formerly the Marie D Jeffrey 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.