Skip to content
The Woods Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Woods Charitable 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.

$483k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$400k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$11MEducation$2.0MHealth$1.6MHuman Services$234kInternational$166kYouth Development$68kAnimals$43kArts & Culture$35kOther$0
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
  • $250k+1 grant · $400k
$2,500
Median grant
3
States reached
$4.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BLUE OAK SCHOOL$400,000
BEST BUDDIES INTERNATIONAL$50,000
KING RIDGE FOUNDATION$20,000
MENTIS$3,000
YOUNG PEOPLE IN RECOVERY$2,500
ALDEA$2,500
ALZEHEIMERS ASSOCIATION$2,000
NEWS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ABUSE$2,000
NAPA COUNTY BICYCLE COALITION$1,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–25, $211k) land where the poverty rate runs at 6%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 1% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $200k → 6%YOUNG PEOPLE IN RECOVERY: $3k → 12%NEWS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND SEXUAL ABUSE: $2k → 9%MENTIS: $3k → 9%ALDEA: $3k → 9%SHARE THE CARE NAPA VALLEY: $1k → 9%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.

Which US states its grants reach

WI
NY
MA
PA
NJ
CA
CO
VA
MD
AZ
NC
DC
FL
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 10% of The Woods Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

The Woods Charitable Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$13M · 12 repeat orgs$2.0M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +55% since the first grant, against +42% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
33

Total granted

$13M
$2.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+55%
+42%

Still filing today

67%
48%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesEducationHealthInternationalArts & CultureFood & NutritionOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • BO
    BLUE OAK SCHOOL
    9× · 2017–2025 · $1.8M · revenue +126%
  • Best Buddies International Inc
    3× · 2023–2025 · $116k · revenue +18%
  • LC
    LANCASTER COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL
    3× · 2017–2024 · $38k · revenue +55%

Funded once

  • PM
    PHOENIX MULTISPORT INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $1.3M · revenue +306%
  • CP
    CANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE
    one grant, 2017 · $200k · revenue -15%
  • CP
    CENTRAL PENNSYLVANIA CLINIC
    one grant, 2017 · $100k
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Sutter Bay Hospitals

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
2
Napa County Land Trust

The mission of the land trust of napa county is to preserve the character of napa county by permanently protecting land. the organization's vision is the protection of unique natural resources, proactive preservation of the scenic beauty,…

Environment
3
Nuvance Health

Improve the health of every person in our community through the efficient delivery of excellent, innovative and compassionate care.

Health
4
California Dental Association

The california dental association is committed to the success of our members in service to their patients and the public.

Community Improvement
5
California Pacific Medical Center Foundation

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
6
Sutter Health

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
7
Kaiser Foundation for the Advancement of Integrated Health Care

Kaiser foundation for the advancement of integrated health care is a nonprofit 501(c)(4) advocacy organization to engage in proactive advocacy to promote understanding of the benefits of integrated care and coverage, and support of the…

Health
8
Napa Valley Museum

The napa valley museum is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to enriching the cultural fabric of our community through exhibitions, collections, educational programs and creative activities that promote knowledge and…

Arts & Culture
9
Nami Sonoma County

NAMI Sonoma County's mission is to build better lives for individuals and families affected by mental illness throughout Sonoma County by providing education, support, and advocacy.

—
10
Mills-Peninsula Hospital Foundation

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
11
Pasadena Hospital Association Ltd

Huntington Health stands for community. We stand for compassion. But more than anything, Huntington stands for health. Providing world-class health care is our specialty, and it's what we've been doing for the San Gabriel Valley since…

Health
12
Planned Parenthood Shasta-Diablo Inc

Planned Parenthood Northern California generates healthier communities through the delivery of quality sexual and reproductive health care services.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Aldea Inc; the most unlike its peers is American Diabetes Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

33 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 33 of the 54 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
32/33
Grantees still filing
19/33
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

JP MORGAN CHARITABLE GIFT FUND - AMYLA LAVRIC: $6,910,050 · OtherJP MORGAN CHARITABLE GIFT FUND - AMYLA LAVRICJP MORGAN CHARITABLE GIFT FUND - SCOTT A STRODE: $4,091,050 · OtherJP MORGAN CHARITABLE GIFT FUND - SCOTT A STRODE+28 more: $437,500 · OtherBLUE OAK SCHOOL: $1,785,000 · EducationBLUE OAK SCHOO…TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $100,000 · Education+4 more: $58,000 · EducationPHOENIX MULTISPORT INC: $1,340,000 · HealthPHOENIX MU…QUEEN OF THE VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $68,000 · Health+3 more: $31,000 · HealthCANINE PARTNERS FOR LIFE: $200,000 · Human Services+5 more: $11,000 · Human ServicesBest Buddies International Inc: $116,000 · InternationalFREE THE SLAVES: $50,000 · InternationalGO CONSCIOUS EARTH INC: $10,000 · InternationalKING RIDGE FOUNDATION: $50,000 · PhilanthropyGREATER MILWAUKEE FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · PhilanthropyPLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC: $5,000 · PhilanthropyCope Family Center: $25,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$11,438,600Education$1,943,000Health$1,439,000Human Services$211,000International$176,000Philanthropy$60,000Crime & Legal$25,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBLUE OAK SCHOOL: $1,785,000 over 9y, 7.7% of budgetPHOENIX MULTISPORT INC: $1,340,000 over 1y, 24% of budgetBest Buddies International Inc: $116,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetQUEEN OF THE VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $68,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetKING RIDGE FOUNDATION: $50,000 over 4y, 13% of budgetFREE THE SLAVES: $50,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetLANCASTER COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL: $38,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetMONMOUTH MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCope Family Center: $25,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetFRIENDS OF WEST HOLLYWOOD ELEMENTARY: $12,500 over 1y, 2.9% of budgetFriends of the Cameo: $10,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetdi Rosa Preserve: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetNAPA VALLEY CANDO: $10,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetNapa Valley Vine Trail Coalition: $6,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMOUNT SAINT MARY'S UNIVERSITY INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAmerican Diabetes Association: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPLAYERS PHILANTHROPY FUND INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR HUMAN ENRICHMENT: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMENTIS: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCommunity Resources for Children: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMILLBROOK SCHOOL: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALDEA INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYOUNG PEOPLE IN RECOVERY: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNEWS: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHANDS ACROSS THE VALLEY INC GEORGE ALTAMURA SR: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetShare the Care Napa Valley: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Community Foundation …Peter a & Vernice H G…McNabb FoundationCommunity Projects IncNapa Valley Vintners …Syar Foundation Susan…Craig and Kathryn Hal…Winiarski Family Foun…Kaiser Foundation Hos…The California Wellne…International Childre…The Vollmer Family Fo…
Community Foundation of the Napa ValleyCA30.2× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of the Napa Valley · Peter a & Vernice H Gasser Foundation · McNabb Foundation · Community Projects Inc · Napa Valley Vintners Healthy Community Fund · Syar Foundation Susan L Syar Director · Craig and Kathryn Hall Foundation · Winiarski Family Foundation · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · The California Wellness Foundation · International Children's Dream Foundation · The Vollmer Family Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization The Woods Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Woods Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 4%
  • Best Buddies International Inc: 4% of income from government
  • Mount Saint Mary's University Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
11report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
typical government reliance, FY20–25
How this is measured
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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to The Woods Charitable Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Woods Charitable 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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 54 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

How this is measured
Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Woods’ filings →

More from the funding graph

The unnamed billions
grants reported with no recipient in the public record
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
The endowment market
who holds foundation money, and what just moved
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home