Skip to content
Tuw James W Hughes Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Tuw James W Hughes Foundation

Its FY2026 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$11k
Granted FY2026still arriving
4
Grants FY2026still arriving
1
States reached
$3k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0194% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Food & Nutrition$11kCrime & Legal$7kEducation$7kYouth Development$6kHuman Services$4kPublic Safety & Disaster$3kOther$0
02FY2026 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,825
Median grant
1
States reached
$201k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ARCS FOUNDATION$2,825
MONARCH SCHOOL PROJECT$2,825
SAN DIEGO EDUCATION FUND$2,825
MISSION TRAILS REGIONAL PARK FOUNDATION$2,825
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 (FY22–23, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%ZERO8HUNDRED: $2k → 11%ZERO8HUNDRED: $2k → 11%POSITIVE MOVEMENT FOUNDATION: $2k → 11%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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$43k · 8 repeat orgs$7k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2026, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
2

Total granted

$43k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+0%
+135%

Still filing today

88%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 75% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24’26
Human ServicesEducationHealthFood & NutritionCivil RightsPublic Safety & DisasterOther
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

  • SD
    SAN DIEGO EDUCATION FUND
    3× · 2023–2026 · $7k · revenue +23%
  • VF
    VOICES FOR CHILDREN
    3× · 2021–2023 · $7k · revenue +0%
  • CR
    COASTAL ROOTS FARM
    2× · 2021–2022 · $5k · revenue +61%

Funded once

  • DA
    DISASTER ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT
    one grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue -76%
  • PM
    POSITIVE MOVEMENT FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $2k · revenue +135%
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
Dreams for Change Inc

Dreams for Change's mission is to respond to the needs of San Diegans by creating innovative and cost-effective programs to empower and stabilize the lives of under-served families and individuals.

Human Services
2
The San Diego Foundation

The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.

Philanthropy
3
Feeding San Diego

On a mission to connect every person facing hunger with nutritious meals by maximizing food rescue. through direct service and community partnerships, feeding san diego provides more than 26 million meals each year to children, families,…

Food & Nutrition
4
San Diego County Citizens' Scholars Foundation
—
5
Center for Community Solutions

The mission is to end relationship and sexual violence by being a catalyst for caring communities and social justice. the vision is for all people to live full, free, expressive, and empowered lives in a safe, healthy, vibrant, and…

Health
6
San Francisco Challenge dba AmericaOne
Recreation & Sports
7
San Francisco Casa

San Francisco CASA transforms the lives of children and youth traumatized and displaced in the foster care and related systems by providing one consistent, caring volunteer advocate, trained to address each childs needs in the court and…

Civil Rights
8
San Diego Regional Economic Development Foundation

To support and cultivate sustainable employment opportunities for San Diego County residents contributing to a prosperous local economy.

Community Improvement
9
San Diego Coasters
Arts & Culture
10
Community Research Foundation Inc

Crf, in partnership with our clients and stakeholders, designs, delivers and evaluates innovative and exemplary behavioral health and social services in a manner that is both culturally and trauma competent, providing these services with…

Unclassified
11
Partners in College Success

Partners in College Success (PiCS) ensures equal access to higher education and an equitable college experience for low-income, refugee, immigrant, foster, homeless and disadvantaged youth in San Diego County. PiCS provides dedicated,…

Education
12
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Monterey County Inc

CASA recruits, trains, and supports community volunteers who advocate for chidren and youth throughout their journey in foster care.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jacobs & Cushman San Diego Food Bank; the most unlike its peers is Disaster Accountability Project. 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

10 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 10 of the 11 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ARCS FOUNDATION: $5,075 · OtherARCS FOUNDATIONCOASTAL ROOTS FARM: $4,500 · OtherCOASTAL ROOTS FARMMONARCH SCHOOL PROJECT: $5,075 · EducationMONARCH SCHOOL PROJEC…REALITY CHANGERS: $4,250 · EducationREALITY CHANGERSSAN DIEGO EDUCATION FUND: $7,075 · HealthSAN DIEGO EDUCA…JACOBS & CUSHMAN SAN DIEGO FOOD BANK: $6,500 · Food & NutritionJACOBS & CUSHM…VOICES FOR CHILDREN: $6,500 · Civil RightsVOICES FOR CHI…Zero8Hundred Inc: $4,000 · Human ServicesZero8Hundred …POSITIVE MOVEMENT FOUNDATION: $2,000 · Human ServicesPOSITIVE MOVE…Mission Trails Regional Park Foundation Inc: $2,825 · Recreation & SportsDISASTER ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT: $2,500 · Public Safety & Disaster
Other$9,575Education$9,325Health$7,075Food & Nutrition$6,500Civil Rights$6,500Human Services$6,000Recreation & Sports$2,825Public Safety & Disaster$2,500

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 budgetSAN DIEGO EDUCATION FUND: $7,075 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetJACOBS & CUSHMAN SAN DIEGO FOOD BANK: $6,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetVOICES FOR CHILDREN: $6,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMONARCH SCHOOL PROJECT: $5,075 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCOASTAL ROOTS FARM: $4,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetREALITY CHANGERS: $4,250 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetZero8Hundred Inc: $4,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetDISASTER ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT: $2,500 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetPOSITIVE MOVEMENT FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 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.

Pratt Memorial FundThe Nordson Corporati…The San Diego Foundat…Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Pratt Memorial FundWI15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Pratt Memorial Fund · The Nordson Corporation Foundation · The San Diego Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Tuw James W Hughes Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Tuw James W Hughes Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 11 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Tuw James W Hughes’ 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