Skip to content
Warren L Thompson and Cecile M Thompson Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Warren L Thompson and Cecile M Thompson Charitable 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.

$136k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$45k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2025.

Health$443kReligion$95kYouth Development$76kEducation$50kPhilanthropy$39kArts & Culture$24kPublic Benefit$21kRecreation & Sports$15kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $126k
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$2.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JUPITER MEDICAL CENTER$45,000
DIOCESE OF PALM BEACH$20,000
HIGH FIVES FOUNDATION$15,000
TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION$15,000
LAFAYETTE PARTNERS IN EDUCATION$11,000
TAHOE TRUCKEE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$10,000
ST JUDES CHILDRENS RESEARCH$10,000
CROHNS AND COLITIS FOUNDATION$5,000
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARKS FOUNDATION$2,000
KQED INC$2,000
WHITE PONY EXPRESS$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 (FY25–25, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%WHITE PONY EXPRESS: $1k → 9%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$710k · 12 repeat orgs$33k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +30% since the first grant, against -10% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
7

Total granted

$710k
$30k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+30%
-10%

Still filing today

83%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $3k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthArts & CultureEducationFood & NutritionPhilanthropyPublic BenefitOther
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

  • JM
    Jupiter Medical Center Inc
    4× · 2022–2025 · $180k · revenue +30%
  • JM
    Jupiter Medical Center Foundation Inc
    3× · 2019–2021 · $145k · revenue +109%
  • ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $63k · revenue +99%

Funded once

  • CR
    Common Roots Incgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $9k · revenue +40%
  • GI
    GRAND ISLE RESCUE INC
    one grant, 2023 · $6k · revenue -21%
  • GI
    GRAND ISLE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT INC
    one grant, 2023 · $6k · revenue -1%
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
Jupiter Medical Center Physicians Group Inc

JMCPG is committed to providing compassionate, personalized care from the region's most trusted team of physicians and health care professionals. Across the Palm Beaches and the Treasure Coast of Florida, JMCPG practice locations offer…

Health
2
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

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

Education
3
Saratoga Care Inc

To serve the people of the Saratoga region by providing them access to excellence in healthcare in a supportive and caring environment.

Health
4
Sutter Health

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
5
MaineGeneral Health

To enhance, every day, the health of our patients, our families and our communities. We do that through a range of health care services for people of all ages, in a variety of care settings.

Health
6
Contra Costa Regional Health Foundation

Contra Costa Regional Health Foundation eliminates barriers and enhances the capabilities of Contra Costa Health Services and the community to improve the saftey, health, and wellness of every Contra Costa County resident.

Health
7
California Pacific Medical Center Foundation

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
8
St Joseph's Hospital of Tampa Foundation Inc

St. joseph's hospitals foundation secures, manages and stewards philanthropic support to benefit the health care mission of st. joseph's hospital, st. joseph's women's hospital, st. joseph's children's hospital of tampa, st. joseph's…

Health
9
Sutter Roseville Medical Center Foundation

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
10
Concord Hospital - Franklin

CH-Franklin is a charitable organization which exists to meet the health needs of individuals within the communities it serves.

Health
11
Children's Hospital Los Angeles

Promotion and advancement of children's health through patient care, research, and education.

Health
12
Concord Hospital - Laconia

CH-Laconia is a charitable organization which exists to meet the health needs of individuals within the communities it serves.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Lafayette Partners in Education; the most unlike its peers is Common Roots Inc. 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

18 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. 18 of the 22 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
10/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Jupiter Medical Center Inc: $180,000 · HealthJupiter Medical Center IncST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $62,550 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INCCROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION INC: $44,000 · HealthCROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION INC+2 more: $11,550 · HealthDIOCESE OF PALM BEACH: $95,000 · OtherDIOCESE OF PALM BEACHHIGH FIVES FOUNDATION: $71,100 · OtherHIGH FIVES FOUNDATIONREGIONAL PARKS FOUNDATION: $15,200 · OtherREGIONAL PARKS FOUNDATION+5 more: $15,050 · Other+5 moreJupiter Medical Center Foundation Inc: $145,000 · PhilanthropyJupiter Medical Center Fou…TAHOE TRUCKEE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $38,100 · PhilanthropyTAHOE TRUCKEE COMMUNITY FO…Lafayette Partners in Education: $28,500 · EducationSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $21,050 · EducationThe Park Theater Trust: $21,500 · Arts & CultureKQED INC: $2,000 · Arts & Culture+1 more: $500 · Arts & CultureSeal Legacy Foundation Inc: $21,000 · Public BenefitCommon Roots Inc: $9,000 · Food & Nutrition
Health$298,100Other$196,350Philanthropy$183,100Education$49,550Arts & Culture$24,000Public Benefit$21,000Food & Nutrition$9,000

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 budgetJupiter Medical Center Inc: $180,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetJupiter Medical Center Foundation Inc: $145,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $62,550 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetCROHN'S & COLITIS FOUNDATION INC: $44,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTAHOE TRUCKEE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $38,100 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetLafayette Partners in Education: $28,500 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetThe Park Theater Trust: $21,500 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $21,050 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSeal Legacy Foundation Inc: $21,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetREGIONAL PARKS FOUNDATION: $15,200 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCommon Roots Inc: $9,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetGRAND ISLE RESCUE INC: $6,050 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetGRAND ISLE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPT INC: $6,050 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetGeorge Mark Childrens Fund: $5,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKQED INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLOXAHATCHEE GUILD INC: $500 over 1y, 1.1% 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.

East Bay Community Fo…The San Francisco Fou…Shell USA Company Fou…Verizon FoundationVanguard Charitable E…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…American Endowment Fo…Morgan Stanley Global…The Blackbaud Giving …National Philanthropi…The Bank of America C…Paypal Charitable Giv…
East Bay Community FoundationCA13× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: East Bay Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · Shell USA Company Foundation · Verizon Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund

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 Warren L Thompson and Cecile M Thompson Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Warren L Thompson and Cecile M Thompson Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Jupiter Medical Center Inc: 2% of income from government
  • Common Roots Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get 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 · 0–20%
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 22 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 Warren L Thompson and Cecile M Thompson’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