· Private foundation
Tljc 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 FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k8 grants · $24k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $118k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PLATT COLLEGE | $25,000 |
| GO CAMPAIGN | $22,000 |
| DANCE AND DIALOGUE | $20,000 |
| UCLA FOUNDATION | $15,975 |
| UC REGENTS | $15,000 |
| WILSHIRE BOULEVARD TEMPLE | $10,000 |
| COMMUNITY PARTNERS | $10,000 |
| BHHS ALUMNI ASSOCIATION | $5,500 |
| THE FEMINIST MAJORITY FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| ST ANNE'S FAMILY SERVICES | $5,000 |
| LACMA | $5,000 |
| CITY OF HOPE | $2,500 |
| BREAST CANCER RESEARCH FOUNDATION | $683 |
| THE MENTAL HEALTH ASSOCIATION OF NY | $270 |
| SUSAN G KOMEN | $250 |
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 (FY19–24, $101k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 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 +52% since the first grant, against +7% for the ones you funded once.
17 repeat relationships — 7 still active in FY2024, 10 since wound down; 7 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, 58% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $53k 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
- DADANCE AND DIALOGUE4× · 2019–2024 · $57k · revenue +148%
- IGInternational Guiding Eyes Inc DBA Guide Dogs of America4× · 2020–2023 · $48k · revenue +87%
- CICALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF THE ARTS3× · 2020–2022 · $45k · revenue +14%
Funded once
- TCTHE CENTER FOR EARLY EDUCATIONone grant, 2021 · $14k · revenue +18%
- TMTHE METHUSELAH FOUNDATIONone grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue -87%
- TWTHE WENDE MUSEUM OF THE COLD WAR INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue ×12
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 jonsson cancer center foundation is the single most important vehicle for raising private funds for cancer research at ucla and plays a key role in advancing cancer treatments and care. please see schedule o for additional information.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
To harness the power of the human immune system and advanced computing technologies to create and translate scientific discoveries into next generation vaccines and therapies for prevention, control and cure of chronic diseases, enabling…
City of Hope's mission is to make hope a reality for all touched by cancer and diabetes. PLEASE SEE SCHEDULE O FOR A CONTINUATION OF OUR MISSION
The samuel waxman cancer research foundation (the "foundation") funds innovative research to bring faster cures to patients. in addition to supporting ongoing collaborative research in specific cancers, our scientists are investigating the…
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.
The central mission of the university of southern california is the development of human beings and society as a whole through the cultivation and enrichment of the human mind and spirit. the principal means by which our mission is…
Our mission is to build a unique institute that bridges basic research and drug discovery, and that attracts the best and brightest scientists, physicians and students to work together synergistically to find cures for neglected human…
The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.
The mission of dfci is to provide expert, compassionate, and equitable care to children, adults, and their families, while advancing the understanding, diagnosis, treatment, cure, and prevention of cancer and related diseases. we train new…
The mission of the university of california, irvine foundation (uc irvine foundation) is to raise and manage private funds to support uc irvine's broader mission of excellence in teaching, research and public service. to this end, the uc…
Promotion and advancement of children's health through patient care, research, and education.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Partners and the most unlike its peers is Daves Killer Bread Foundation. 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 32 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 2% 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.
54 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. 54 of the 80 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 DANCE AND DIALOGUE ↗
- Who funds International Guiding Eyes Inc DBA Guide Dogs of America ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF THE ARTS ↗
- Who funds BHHS ALUMNI ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THE LIBRARY FOUNDATION OF LOS ANGELES ↗
- Who funds UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Go Campaign ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR EARLY EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds JVS SOCAL ↗
- Who funds ISRAEL EMERGENCY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds One Voice ↗
- Who funds THE METHUSELAH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE WENDE MUSEUM OF THE COLD WAR INC ↗
- Who funds PICO UNION PROJECT ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY PARTNERS ↗
- Who funds I AM ALS ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF MALIBU URGENT CARE CENTER ↗
- Who funds VISIONSSERVICES FOR THE BLIND AND VISUALLY IMPAIRED ↗
- Who funds PIECE BY PIECE ↗
- Who funds FEMINIST MAJORITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds A NEW WAY OF LIFE REENTRY PROJECT ↗
- Who funds St Anne's Family Services ↗
- Who funds CHAI LIFELINE INC ↗
- Who funds Heart Touch Project ↗
- Who funds VISION TO LEARN ↗
- Who funds WILDLIFE CONSERVATION NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF YOUNG PEOPLE IN GROUPS ↗
- Who funds SWIPE OUT HUNGER ↗
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: Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · California Community Foundation · Stolaroff Foundation Inc · The Ahmanson Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The Marilyn and Jeffrey Katzenberg Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles Group · The Rose Hills Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · The Annenberg Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Jewish Communal Fund
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 Tljc 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.
- City Year Inc — 11% 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.