Skip to content
Troper Wojcicki Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Troper Wojcicki 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.

$16M
Granted FY2024still arriving
60
Grants FY2024still arriving
14
States reached
$1.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Health$13MEnvironment$13MInternational$10MEducation$10.0MFood & Nutrition$2.7MHousing & Shelter$2.7MYouth Development$1.7MScience & Tech$1.7MOther$0
02FY2024 · 60 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

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
14
States reached
$339M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER$1,000,000
RAINFOREST TRUST$1,000,000
ROOM TO READ$1,000,000
PARTNERS IN HEALTH$750,000
INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE INC$750,000
DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE INC$606,667
HAMILTON FAMILIES$500,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED$500,000
PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE$500,000
EARTHJUSTICE$500,000
LA JOLLA INSTITUTE FOR IMMUNOLOGY$500,000
CALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES$500,000
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC$500,000
THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO$460,000
DANA-FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE INC$414,000
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 (FY21–24, $1.1M) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 56% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%BERNARD OSHER MARIN JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $112k → 8%COMMUNITY ACTION OF NAPA VALLEY: $10k → 9%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF THE EAST BAY: $57k → 10%JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF SAN FRANCISCO: $311k → 10%BAY AREA FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE: $30k → 8%BAY AREA FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE: $25k → 8%GEOKIDS: $2k → 7%BAY AREA FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE: $25k → 8%PENINSULA JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $178k → 7%BAY AREA FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE: $25k → 8%BAY AREA FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE: $10k → 8%BAY AREA FRIENDSHIP CIRCLE: $5k → 8%BEYOND FISTULA: $15k → 8%BEYOND FISTULA: $15k → 8%BEYOND FISTULA: $15k → 8%BEYOND FISTULA: $15k → 8%JEWISH FAMILY & CHILDRENS SERVICES: $250k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

VT
WA
WI
NY
MA
PA
CA
CO
MO
VA
MD
AR
TN
NC
DC
TX
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 7% of Troper Wojcicki Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Troper Wojcicki Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 2.8% 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.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$42M · 42 repeat orgs$12M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +15% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

42 repeat relationships: 37 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

42
41

Total granted

$42M
$9.2M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+15%
+14%

Still filing today

95%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3.2M went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
EducationEnvironmentInternationalHealthHuman ServicesFood & 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

  • IR
    International Rescue Committee INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $2.9M · revenue +38%
  • RT
    RAINFOREST TRUST
    3× · 2022–2024 · $2.5M · revenue +4%
  • AF
    AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE OCEAN CLEANUP FOUNDATION
    4× · 2021–2024 · $2.3M · revenue +47%

Funded once

  • HL
    H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER & RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2023 · $2.0M · revenue +21%
  • TB
    The Broad Institute Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $1.4M · revenue -2%
  • JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITYgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $1.0M · revenue +40%
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
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
2
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
3
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
4
Oceana Inc

To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.

Environment
5
Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.

Education
6
United States Naval Institute

Provide an independent forum for those who dare to read, think, speak, and write to advance the professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power and other issues critical to global security.

—
7
Sustainable Fisheries Partnership Foundation

To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.

Animals
8
University of California Irvine Foundation

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…

Education
9
The Uc Davis Foundation

The mission of the uc davis foundation is to secure, steward and manage private gifts for uc davis.

Education
10
American Association for the Advancement of Science

Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…

Science & Tech
11
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

The organization provides professional investment management services for endowed gifts and financial assets entrusted to the ucsf foundation.

Education
12
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The San Diego Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Calpaws K9 Rescue. 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

90 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. 90 of the 104 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
90/90
Grantees still filing
52/90
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE OCEAN CLEANUP FOUNDATION: $2,325,000 · OtherAMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE OCEAN CLEA…THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER: $2,004,115 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSO…LIFEMOVES: $1,350,080 · OtherLIFEMOVESTHE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO: $1,348,929 · OtherTHE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF C…POPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL: $1,000,080 · OtherPOPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONALBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE PENINSULA: $1,350,000 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE PENINSUL…HAMILTON FAMILIES: $1,300,000 · OtherHAMILTON FAMILIESTREVOR PROJECT INC: $1,050,000 · OtherTREVOR PROJECT INC+44 more: $6,126,360 · Other+44 moreROOM TO READ: $2,800,000 · EducationROOM TO READPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $2,331,358 · EducationPresident and Fello…THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $1,350,000 · EducationTHE BOARD OF TRUSTE…THE MALALA FUND: $1,000,080 · EducationTHE MALALA FUNDJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $1,000,000 · EducationJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVE…BERKLEE COLLEGE OF MUSIC INC: $500,045 · Education+10 more: $1,442,334 · Education+10 morePARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $3,022,435 · HealthPARTNERS IN HEALTH …H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER & RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOUNDATION INC: $1,980,000 · HealthH LEE MOFFITT CANCE…Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $1,783,333 · HealthDana-Farber Cancer …The Broad Institute Inc: $1,450,000 · HealthThe Broad Institute…MEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $1,000,000 · HealthMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETT…PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $700,020 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD …+2 more: $331,667 · HealthInternational Rescue Committee INC: $2,852,007 · InternationalInternational Re…RAINFOREST TRUST: $2,500,045 · InternationalRAINFOREST TRUSTWATERORG: $1,250,000 · InternationalWATERORGMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $866,681 · InternationalMEDECINS SANS FR…AMIGOS OF COSTA RICA INC: $492,628 · InternationalAMIGOS OF COSTA …VITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $325,000 · InternationalCAMFED USA FOUNDATION: $300,000 · International+3 more: $250,000 · InternationalENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,750,023 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL D…EARTHJUSTICE: $1,700,023 · EnvironmentEARTHJUSTICENATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $1,600,023 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURC…FRIENDS OF THE OSA: $1,100,023 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF THE …NEW VENTURE FUND: $500,000 · EnvironmentNEW VENTURE FUN…SAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE: $450,080 · EnvironmentSAVE THE REDWOO…SEMPERVIRENS FUND: $300,000 · Environment+5 more: $582,000 · Environment+5 moreSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $2,250,023 · Food & NutritionFOOD BANK OF CONTRA COSTA AND SOLANO: $175,000 · Food & Nutrition+1 more: $40,000 · Food & NutritionCALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: $1,500,023 · Arts & Culture+2 more: $27,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$17,854,564Education$10,423,817Health$10,267,455International$8,836,361Environment$7,982,172Food & Nutrition$2,465,023Arts & Culture$1,527,023

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $3,022,435 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetInternational Rescue Committee INC: $2,852,007 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetROOM TO READ: $2,800,000 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetRAINFOREST TRUST: $2,500,045 over 3y, 5.4% of budgetPresident and Fellows of Harvard College: $2,331,358 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE OCEAN CLEANUP FOUNDATION: $2,325,000 over 4y, 5.0% of budgetSECOND HARVEST OF SILICON VALLEY: $2,250,023 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetH LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER & RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOUNDATION INC: $1,980,000 over 1y, 5.8% of budgetDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $1,783,333 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $1,750,023 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $1,700,023 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $1,600,023 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetCALIFORNIA ACADEMY OF SCIENCES: $1,500,023 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetThe Broad Institute Inc: $1,450,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetLIFEMOVES: $1,350,080 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetTHE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY: $1,350,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE PENINSULA: $1,350,000 over 4y, 1.9% of budgetHAMILTON FAMILIES: $1,300,000 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetWATERORG: $1,250,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE OSA: $1,100,023 over 4y, 13% of budgetTREVOR PROJECT INC: $1,050,000 over 3y, 1.0% of budgetTHE MALALA FUND: $1,000,080 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetPOPULATION SERVICES INTERNATIONAL: $1,000,080 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetMEMORIAL SLOAN-KETTERING CANCER CENTER: $1,000,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetJOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY: $1,000,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC: $866,681 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $700,020 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $525,080 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBERKLEE COLLEGE OF MUSIC INC: $500,045 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTHE HARVARD CRIMSON INC: $500,000 over 1y, 48% of budgetNEW VENTURE FUND: $500,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLA JOLLA INSTITUTE FOR IMMUNOLOGY: $500,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetAMIGOS OF COSTA RICA INC: $492,628 over 4y, 2.4% of budgetSAVE THE REDWOODS LEAGUE: $450,080 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetOSHMAN FAMILY JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER: $424,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetTEENSMART INTERNATIONAL: $350,000 over 4y, 19% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO FOUNDATION: $333,334 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetVITAL VOICES GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP INC: $325,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetCODEORG: $320,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetJEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER OF SAN FRANCISCO: $311,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetHAPPY LUNGS PROJECT: $306,667 over 1y, 55% of budgetCAMFED USA FOUNDATION: $300,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetSEMPERVIRENS FUND: $300,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetMONTEREY BAY AQUARIUM FOUNDATION: $300,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetRARE: $250,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetJEWISH FAMILY AND CHILDREN'S SERVICES: $250,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetUC SANTA CRUZ FOUNDATION: $250,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetVanderbilt University: $228,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Jewish Community Fede…Silicon Valley Commun…Koret FoundationDaffy Charitable FundThe Anne Wojcicki Fou…The William & Flora H…John Pritzker Family …Gs Donor Advised Phil…The Intuit FoundationThe San Francisco Fou…The Koum Family Found…Taube Foundation for …
Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & SonomaCA25.2× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Jewish Community Federation of San Francisco the Peninsula Marin & Sonoma · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Koret Foundation · Daffy Charitable Fund · The Anne Wojcicki Foundation · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · John Pritzker Family Fund · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Intuit Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · The Koum Family Foundation · Taube Foundation for Jewish Life and Culture

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 Troper Wojcicki Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Troper Wojcicki Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • The Broad Institute Inc: 19% of income from government
  • Johns Hopkins University: 12% of income from government
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: 7% of income from government
  • Berklee College of Music Inc: 1% of income from government
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation: 0% of income from government
  • Milton Academy: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
20report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 Troper Wojcicki Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Troper Wojcicki 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 104 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 Troper Wojcicki’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