How much did TROPER WOJCICKI FOUNDATION grant in FY2024?

Environment$7.9MEducation$7.9MHealth$7.2MInternational$7.1MFood & Nutrition$2.0MArts & Culture$1.5MYouth Development$1.4MHousing & Shelter$1.3MCivil Rights$1.1MOther$21M

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2021

power partnershipjewishfood bankscholarshiprabbicongregation emekemek beracha

2022

international rescuerescue committeepartners health

2023

therapiestumorlung cancerclinicalmutantnsclc

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 60 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k4 grants · $9k
$10k–50k10 grants · $210k
$50k–250k18 grants · $2.3M
$250k+28 grants · $13M

$220,243

Median grant

States reached

$339M

Total assets

Largest grants

RAINFOREST TRUST$1,000,000
ROOM TO READ$1,000,000
MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER$1,000,000
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE INC$750,000
PARTNERS IN HEALTH$750,000
DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE INC$606,667
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC$500,000
EARTHJUSTICE$500,000
LA JOLLA INSTITUTE FOR IMMUNOLOGY$500,000
PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE$500,000
CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES$500,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED$500,000
HAMILTON FAMILIES$500,000
THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO$460,000
DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE INC$414,000

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY21–24, $988k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9% — the area typically sits at 9%. 63% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

73%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$43M · 45 repeat orgs$16M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +57% since the first grant, against +57% for the ones you funded once.

45 repeat relationships — 37 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down; 18 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$43M

$11M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+57%

Still filing today

82%

74%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4.8M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationEnvironmentInternationalHuman ServicesHealthPhilanthropyOther

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

RT
ROOM TO READ
4× · 2021–2024 · $2.7M · revenue +23%
RT
RAINFOREST TRUST
3× · 2022–2024 · $2.5M · revenue +114%
PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE
4× · 2021–2024 · $2.3M · revenue +5%

Funded once

HL
H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOUNDATIONgraduated
one grant, 2023 · $2.0M · revenue +76%
BI
BROAD INSTITUTE INCgraduated
one grant, 2023 · $1.4M · revenue +92%
JH
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
one grant, 2021 · $1.0M

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

04Your field

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.

Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

the organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the UCSF Foundation.

Education

San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory

The San Francisco Bay Bird Observatory uses science to conserve birds and habitats. Our avian monitoring and habitat restoration activities provide critical data that we use to educate land managers and the public, and contribute to…

Environment

University of California

To raise and manage private funds to support uci's broader mission of excellence in teaching, research and public service.

Education

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

California Forward

California forward (ca fwd) brings people together across regions to improve government and create resilient growth statewide.

Public Benefit

Aquarium of the Pacific Corporation

The aquarium of the pacific's mission is to instill a sense of wonder, respect, and stewardship for the pacific ocean, its inhabitants, and ecosystems.

Animals

California Water Data Consortium

The California Water Data Consortium is an independent, nonprofit organization created by a partnership of state agencies and others to ensure that Californians have access to the best possible water and ecological information to make…

Science & Tech

California Agricultural Leadership Found

To enhance the long-term viability of california agriculture through leadership development, which in turn benefits the people and communities that agriculture serves. we grow leaders who make a difference.

Food & Nutrition

Biocom California

To achieve individual and collective success on the world stage of scientific and technological innovation.

—

Silicon Schools Fund Inc

Support the launch of excellent new schools and innovative practices that improve education.

Education

Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund International

A people-centered approach to the conservation of gorillas and their habitats in Africa

—

Icafund

Provide coaching, connections, and capital to grow san francisco bay area businesses.

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Resource Area for Teaching and the most unlike its peers is The Tech Interactive. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 31 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/87

the rest of the field

11%

206,164/1,819,478

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.

05the grantee network

84 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

84/84

Grantees still filing

69/84

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$24,907,014Environment$7,932,172Education$7,900,483Health$7,245,020International$7,069,680Food & Nutrition$1,965,023Arts & Culture$1,527,023

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.

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.

Jewish Community Federation of SanCA29.7× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Federation of San · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Gordon E and Betty I Moore Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund · The San Francisco Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Koret Foundation · The Anne Wojcicki Foundation · Lisa & Douglas Goldman Fund · The Shimon Ben Joseph Foundation · Bright Funds Foundation · The David and Lucile Packard 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 organisation TROPER WOJCICKI 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

5get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: HAPPY LUNGS PROJECT.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~7 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 4 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

4 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.6× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 870957020 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on HAPPY LUNGS PROJECT, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 7 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 55% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Troper Wojcicki Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Troper Wojcicki Foundation through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

TROPER WOJCICKI FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

84 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Troper Wojcicki Foundation?

More from the funding graph

TROPER WOJCICKI FOUNDATION

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

84 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Troper Wojcicki Foundation?

More from the funding graph