Skip to content

· Private foundation

Tom & Nancy Elsaesser 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.

$88k
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$25k
Largest
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

International$305kHuman Services$257kHealth$201kFood & Nutrition$55kYouth Development$54kAnimals$30kArts & Culture$26kEnvironment$17kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $18k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $70k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$234k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PEOPLE HELPING PEOPLE$25,000
DIRECT RELIEF$25,000
PASADENA HUMANE SOCIETY$10,000
COTTAGE HOSPITAL OF STA YNEZ VALLEY$10,000
CANCER FOUNDATION OF SANTA BARBARA$5,000
STUART C GILDRED FAMILY YMCA$5,000
CARES 4PAWS$2,000
SURFRIDER FOUNDATION$2,000
ARTS OUTREACH$1,000
AMERICAN WOMEN FOR INTERNATIONAL UN$1,000
CALIFORNIA NATURE ART MUSEUM$1,000
ELVERHOJ MUSEUM$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 (FY17–21, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%FRIENDS OF VENTURA COUNTY ANIMAL SV: $2k → 10%FRIENDS OF VENTURA COUNTY ANIMAL SV: $2k → 10%FRIENDS OF VENTURA COUNTY ANIMAL SV: $2k → 10%FRIENDS OF VENTURA COUNTY ANIMAL SV: $2k → 10%FRIENDS OF VENTURA COUNTY ANIMAL SV: $2k → 10%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.
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 5% of Tom & Nancy Elsaesser Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 97% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 92%.

Tom & Nancy Elsaesser Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 5.2% directed abroad (not shown)
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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$833k · 19 repeat orgs$132k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +94% since the first grant, against +52% for those funded once.

19 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

19
8

Total granted

$833k
$122k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+94%
+52%

Still filing today

53%
13%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
HealthInternationalAnimalsFood & NutritionEnvironmentArts & CultureOther
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

  • DIRECT RELIEF
    9× · 2017–2025 · $250k · revenue +94%
  • TP
    TURNING POINT FOUNDATION
    5× · 2017–2021 · $60k · revenue +217%
  • FS
    FOOD SHARE INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $55k · revenue +94%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $50k
  • CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTERgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $50k · revenue +52%
  • CH
    COTTAGE HOSPITAL OF SANTA YNEZ VALL
    one grant, 2021 · $10k
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
Marin Humane Society

Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.

Animals
2
Santa Barbara Humane Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Santa barbara humane operates two campuses located in santa barbara and santa maria providing care for community-owned and homeless animals. both campuses offer affordable high quality veterinary care, compassionate behavior training…

Animals
3
Animal Care Sanctuary

Animal care sanctuary's lifesaving mission as a no kill organization envisions a community that promotes turning compassion into action for companion animals by: 1.) adopting healthy pet companions into loving homes. 2.) promoting the…

Animals
4
The California Wildlife Center

The california wildlife center (cwc) takes responsibility for the protection of all native wildlife through rehabilitiation, education and conservation. as the los angeles area's premier wildlife medical care and rehabilitation facility,…

Health
5
Cancer Support Community Valley Ventura/Santa Barbara Inc

Cancer support community valley/ventura/santa barbaras mission is to uplift and strengthen people impacted by cancer by providing support, fostering compassionate communities, and breaking down barriers to care.

—
6
Rancho Coastal Humane Society

See schedule orancho coastal is dedicated to the rescue and shelter of abandoned companion animals. it encourages adoptions into loving homes and provides educational and community outreach programs designed to enhance the human-animal…

Animals
7
The California Channel

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…

—
8
California Forward

Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…

Public Benefit
9
Californians Against Waste Foundation

Research, develop and promote waste reduction policies and programs

Environment
10
Biocom California

Accelerating life science success.

—
11
The Animal Rescue Center of California

Help rescue, adopt, and provide medical care for abandoned animals in the coachella valley

Animals
12
California Life Sciences Association

Clsa advances californias world-leading life sciences innovation ecosystem by advocating for effective national, state and local public policies and supporting entrepreneurs and life sciences businesses.

Community Improvement
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cancer Foundation of Santa Barbara; the most unlike its peers is Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. 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

12 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. 12 of the 28 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PEOPLE HELPING PEOPLE: $240,000 · OtherPEOPLE HELPING PEOPLEIndividual grant recipient: $50,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCOTTAGE HOSPITAL OF SANTA YNEZ: $35,000 · OtherCOTTAGE HOSPITAL OF SANTA YNEZBOYS GIRLS CLUB OF CAMARILLO: $34,000 · OtherBOYS GIRLS CLUB OF CAMARILLOCOTTAGE HOSPITAL OF STA YNEZ VALLEY: $30,000 · OtherCOTTAGE HOSPITAL OF STA YNEZ VALLEY+12 more: $83,800 · Other+12 moreDIRECT RELIEF: $250,000 · InternationalDIRECT RELIEF+1 more: $4,500 · InternationalTURNING POINT FOUNDATION: $60,000 · HealthTURNING POINT …CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $50,000 · HealthCEDARS-SINAI M…CANCER FOUNDATION OF SANTA BARBARA: $15,000 · HealthCANCER FOUNDAT…FOOD SHARE INC: $55,000 · Food & NutritionCARE4Paws Inc: $10,000 · AnimalsPASADENA HUMANE: $10,000 · AnimalsTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $17,000 · EnvironmentCALIFORNIA NATURE ART MUSEUM: $10,000 · Arts & CultureANIMAL SERVICES FOUNDATION OF VENTURA COUNTY: $10,000 · Human Services
Other$472,800International$254,500Health$125,000Food & Nutrition$55,000Animals$20,000Environment$17,000Arts & Culture$10,000Human Services$10,000

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 budgetDIRECT RELIEF: $250,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetTURNING POINT FOUNDATION: $60,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetFOOD SHARE INC: $55,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER: $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION: $17,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetCANCER FOUNDATION OF SANTA BARBARA: $15,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCALIFORNIA NATURE ART MUSEUM: $10,000 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetCARE4Paws Inc: $10,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetANIMAL SERVICES FOUNDATION OF VENTURA COUNTY: $10,000 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetARTS OUTREACH: $8,000 over 8y, 0.8% of budgetAMERICAN WOMEN FOR INTERNATIONAL UNDERSTANDING: $4,500 over 5y, 0.5% 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.

  • Who funds DIRECT RELIEF ↗
  • Who funds TURNING POINT FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FOOD SHARE INC ↗
  • Who funds CEDARS-SINAI MEDICAL CENTER ↗
  • Who funds THE SURFRIDER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CANCER FOUNDATION OF SANTA BARBARA ↗
  • Who funds CALIFORNIA NATURE ART MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds CARE4Paws Inc ↗
  • Who funds PASADENA HUMANE ↗
  • Who funds ANIMAL SERVICES FOUNDATION OF VENTURA COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds ARTS OUTREACH ↗
  • Who funds AMERICAN WOMEN FOR INTERNATIONAL UNDERSTANDING ↗

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.

Ann Jackson Family FoundationCA13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ann Jackson Family Foundation · The Wood-Claeyssens Foundation · Hutton Foundation Dba Hutton Parker Foundation · Santa Barbara Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Tom & Nancy Elsaesser Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tom & Nancy Elsaesser Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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.

    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 28 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 Tom & Nancy Elsaesser’s filings →

    More from the funding graph