Skip to content
Tomkat Ranch Educational Foundation at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Private foundation

Tomkat Ranch Educational 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.

$480k
Granted FY2024still arriving
39
Grants FY2024still arriving
8
States reached
$359k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$5.3MFood & Nutrition$3.4MAnimals$2.9MCommunity Improvement$957kEducation$701kPhilanthropy$514kRecreation & Sports$407kHuman Services$305kOther$0
02FY2024 · 39 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k37 grants · $111k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $250k+1 grant · $359k
$2,500
Median grant
8
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
POINT BLUE CONSERVATION SCIENCE$359,000
PUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR$10,000
COMMUNITY ALLIANCE WITH FAMILY FARMERS$7,050
EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE INC$7,000
AGRICULTURAL INSTITUTE OF MARIN (AIM)$6,765
CIVIL EATS$5,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
VIDA VERDE NATURE EDUCATION$5,000
CURIODYSSEY$5,000
ABUNDANT GRACE COASTSIDE WORKER$5,000
ECOLOGICAL FARMING ASSOCIATION$5,000
PIE RANCH$4,750
KITCHEN TABLE ADVISORS$4,300
SAN MATEO RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT$4,000
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION$4,000
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 (FY19–24, $109k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 78% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%WOMEN IN RANCHING: $25k → 15%WOMEN IN RANCHING INC: $25k → 15%CARDEA CENTER FOR WOMEN: $500 → 8%SCOPA HAS A DREAM INC: $15k → 9%SPECIAL SERVICE FOR GROUPS INC: $35k → 14%ABUNDANT GRACE COASTSIDE WORKER: $5k → 7%ABUNDANT GRACE COASTSIDE WORKER: $2k → 7%ALAS AYUDANDO LATINOS A SONAR: $2k → 7%ALAS AYUDANDO LATINOS A SONAR: $364 → 7%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

VT
WA
ID
MT
MN
WI
NY
OR
SD
CT
CA
UT
CO
NE
VA
DE
AZ
NM
KS
AR
NC
SC
DC
GA
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$12M · 71 repeat orgs$3.5M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +76% since the first grant, against +26% for those funded once.

71 repeat relationships: 32 still active in FY2024, 39 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

71
74

Total granted

$12M
$3.5M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+76%
+26%

Still filing today

85%
64%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentFood & NutritionEducationHuman ServicesArts & CultureCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • PR
    POINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.9M · revenue +158%
  • FOODCORPS INC
    3× · 2018–2023 · $625k · revenue +77%
  • EL
    EAT LEARN PLAY FOUNDATION
    2× · 2020–2022 · $455k · revenue +57%

Funded once

  • TR
    THE REGENSIS INSTITUTE
    one grant, 2022 · $650k · revenue -51% · 49% of their budget
  • CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF FOOD BANKS
    one grant, 2020 · $428k · revenue +7%
  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
    one grant, 2018 · $300k
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
Center for the study of the Americas

Within the Americas promoting dialogue and research, producing studies and reports, conducting courses and conferences particularly in the areas of agroecology and food security

—
2
Sustainable Conservation

Sustainable Conservation advances the collaborative stewardship of Californias land, air, and water for the benefit of nature and people. For over three decades, Sustainable Conservation has built coalitions of people with different…

Environment
3
Ag Innovations Network

Ag Innovations facilitates collaboration among diverse groups to develop holistic solutions to California's most complex agricultural, natural resource and environmental challenges.

Food & Nutrition
4
Multinational Exchange for Sustainable a Mesa andor Mesa Inc

MESA connects and cultivates sustainable farmers and food systems leaders around the world.

Education
5
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
6
Sustainable Growers
—
7
California Farmland Trust

The mission of the California Farmland Trust is to help farmers protect the best farmland in the world.

Environment
8
Equitable Food Initiative

EFIs mission is to transform the produce industry and the lives of farmworkers by facilitating collaboration among workers, agricultural employers, retail buyers and consumer advocates.

Human Services
9
California Institute for Biodiversity

Create and publish educational materials, conduct professional development, promote awareness, and sponsor research on the spectacular biological diversity of the State of CA.

Education
10
Sustainable Systems Research Foundation

The Sustainable Systems Research Foundation is a 501(c)3 non-profit green think tank and project incubator based in Santa Cruz, California. SSRF seeks to: Address complex and wicked environmental and sustainability problems that confound…

Human Services
11
Food Action

Our mission is to educate, organize and advocate for food and farming systems to become economically prosperous, ecologically sound and socially equitable.

—
12
Food Forward Inc

Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sustainable Agriculture and Food Systems Funders; the most unlike its peers is Holistic Manangement International. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

118 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. 118 of the 155 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.

10
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
35
Early backer (in before they grew)
115/118
Grantees still filing
74/118
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CENTER FOR ECOLITERACY: $4,014,750 · EnvironmentCENTER FOR ECOLITERACYUrban Tilth: $170,000 · Environment+27 more: $683,816 · Environment+27 morePOINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY: $2,899,683 · AnimalsPOINT REYES BIRD OBSE…+2 more: $2,000 · AnimalsUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA: $300,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIACOKE FARMS: $214,704 · OtherCOKE FARMSFRESNO FOOD COMMONS TRUST: $200,000 · OtherFRESNO FOOD COMMONS TRUS…FOOD BANK FOR MONTEREY COUNTY: $157,825 · OtherFEED COOPERATIVE INC: $126,694 · OtherThe Land Institute: $125,000 · OtherALLENSWORTH PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION: $396,565 · OtherALLENSWORTH PROGRESSIVE …PUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR: $210,971 · OtherPUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR+69 more: $1,496,514 · Other+69 moreFOODCORPS INC: $625,000 · Food & NutritionFOODCORPS INCCALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF FOOD BANKS: $427,625 · Food & NutritionCALIFORNIA AS…FRESH APPROACH: $232,500 · Food & NutritionFRESH APPROAC…Center for Food Safety: $125,000 · Food & NutritionCenter for Fo…Farm2People: $110,400 · Food & NutritionFarm2PeopleREGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE FOUNDATION: $100,000 · Food & NutritionREGENERATIVE …+11 more: $196,030 · Food & Nutrition+11 moreTHE REGENSIS INSTITUTE: $650,000 · Community ImprovementASIAN BUSINESS INSTITUTE & RESOURCE CENTER: $199,000 · Community ImprovementMODOC HARVEST: $80,000 · Community Improvement+3 more: $65,000 · Community ImprovementEAT LEARN PLAY FOUNDATION: $455,375 · PhilanthropyMeridian Institute: $426,343 · Philanthropy+3 more: $45,350 · PhilanthropyGoatapelli Foundation: $100,000 · EducationSKIDMORE COLLEGE: $100,000 · EducationCALIFORNIA FARMLINK: $54,500 · EducationOregon State University Foundation: $35,000 · EducationMAVERICKS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $32,942 · EducationGreen Technical Education and Employment: $25,000 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $16,000 · EducationThe University Foundation California State University Chico: $15,000 · Education+10 more: $35,871 · Education
Environment$4,868,566Animals$2,901,683Other$3,228,273Food & Nutrition$1,816,555Community Improvement$994,000Philanthropy$927,068Education$414,313

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

25%50%75%100%$10k$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCENTER FOR ECOLITERACY: $4,014,750 over 6y, 50% of budgetPOINT REYES BIRD OBSERVATORY: $2,899,683 over 8y, 4.1% of budgetTHE REGENSIS INSTITUTE: $650,000 over 1y, 49% of budgetFOODCORPS INC: $625,000 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetEAT LEARN PLAY FOUNDATION: $455,375 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetCALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF FOOD BANKS: $427,625 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMeridian Institute: $426,343 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetALLENSWORTH PROGRESSIVE ASSOCIATION: $396,565 over 2y, 86% of budgetFRESH APPROACH: $232,500 over 3y, 4.2% of budgetPUENTE DE LA COSTA SUR: $210,971 over 8y, 0.9% of budgetFRESNO FOOD COMMONS TRUST: $200,000 over 1y, 48% of budgetASIAN BUSINESS INSTITUTE & RESOURCE CENTER: $199,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetUrban Tilth: $170,000 over 2y, 2.4% of budgetFOOD BANK FOR MONTEREY COUNTY: $157,825 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetThe Land Institute: $125,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetCenter for Food Safety: $125,000 over 2y, 1.7% of budgetSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION: $114,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetFarm2People: $110,400 over 2y, 66% of budgetREGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetGoatapelli Foundation: $100,000 over 1y, 73% of budgetECDYSIS FOUNDATION: $100,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetSKIDMORE COLLEGE: $100,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWESTERN LANDOWNERS ALLIANCE: $90,000 over 6y, 1.8% of budgetMULTIPLIER: $86,900 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetVIDA VERDE NATURE EDUCATION: $85,000 over 8y, 1.4% of budgetMODOC HARVEST: $80,000 over 1y, 27% of budgetHOMELESS GARDEN PROJECT: $77,980 over 3y, 2.6% of budgetYOLO FARM TO FORK: $75,000 over 1y, 21% of budgetCOMMUNITY ALLIANCE WITH FAMILY FARMERS: $73,050 over 6y, 1.9% of budgetSONOMA FAMILY MEAL: $56,250 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetMARIN PERFORMING STARS: $56,000 over 1y, 8.8% of budgetCALIFORNIA FARMLINK: $54,500 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetECOTRUST: $50,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetReal Organic Project Inc: $50,000 over 2y, 2.5% of budgetWOMEN IN RANCHING INC: $50,000 over 2y, 9.0% of budgetPIE RANCH: $45,682 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetACTA NON VERBA YOUTH URBAN FARM PROJECT: $45,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetFIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE: $40,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetEcological Farming Association: $36,875 over 8y, 0.9% of budgetWORLD FOOD BANK KITCHEN AND URBAN F ARM: $36,000 over 1y, 51% of budgetSpecial Service for Groups Inc: $35,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOregon State University Foundation: $35,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetWHITE BUFFALO LAND TRUST: $34,000 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetMAVERICKS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $32,942 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetTZICATL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetMOVEMENT STRATEGY CENTER: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGreen Technical Education and Employment: $25,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetHOLISTIC MANANGEMENT INTERNATIONAL: $25,000 over 8y, 0.6% 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 …The Schmidt Family Fo…Clif Family FoundationPatagoniaorgMarin Community Found…Rsf Social Finance IncSilicon Valley Commun…Tides FoundationTomkat FoundationGlobetrotter Foundati…The David and Lucile …The San Francisco Fou…
Community Foundation for San Benito CountyCA61.9× affinity28 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation for San Benito County · The Schmidt Family Foundation · Clif Family Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Marin Community Foundation · Rsf Social Finance Inc · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · Tomkat Foundation · Globetrotter Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard Foundation · The San Francisco 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 Tomkat Ranch Educational Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tomkat Ranch Educational Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 14%
  • Foodcorps Inc: 21% of income from government
  • Ecotrust: 14% of income from government
  • Real Organic Project Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Oregon State University Foundation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
35report 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 Tomkat Ranch Educational Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Tomkat Ranch Educational 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 155 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Tomkat Ranch Educational’s 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