Skip to content
West Contra Costa Public Education Fund at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

West Contra Costa Public Education Fund

Grant making organization supporting students and education initiatives of West Contra Costa USD.

$408k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$301k
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, FY2020 to 2025.

Education$1.6MPublic Benefit$778kHousing & Shelter$590kPhilanthropy$396kEmployment$308kPublic Safety & Disaster$152kHealth$75kArts & Culture$71kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $328,123, the rows itemized in this filing. The $407,986 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $79,863 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $13k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $14k
  • $250k+1 grant · $301k
$14,250
Median grant
2
States reached
$8.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
West Contra Costa USD$300,873
Alexander Fleming$14,250
STUDENTS RISING ABOVE$7,000
ONEGOAL$6,000
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 (FY20–20, $8k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YMCA of the East Bay: $8k → 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.
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 10% of West Contra Costa Public Education Fund’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 99% of the giving stays in CA; by stated purpose, 93%.

West Contra Costa Public Education Fundlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 5.1% 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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.9M · 7 repeat orgs$451k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +71% since the first grant, against +19% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
10

Total granted

$2.9M
$424k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+71%
+19%

Still filing today

57%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $27k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
PhilanthropyEducationPublic BenefitCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesArts & CultureOther
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

  • WC
    WEST CONTRA COSTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
    5× · 2020–2025 · $1.5M
  • CF
    Community Financial Resources
    4× · 2020–2023 · $765k · revenue +71% · 50% of their budget
  • PI
    PARTNERS IN SCHOOL INNOVATION
    2× · 2021–2022 · $344k · revenue -16%

Funded once

  • RL
    RICHMOND LAND
    one grant, 2020 · $250k · revenue +19% · 29% of their budget
  • TW
    THE WILLIAM & FLORA HEWLETT FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $64k · revenue -14%
  • BF
    BEAM FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2024 · $46k · revenue +137%
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
Bay Area Hybrid College Initiative Dba Rivet School

Rivet School's mission is to build and scale a new model of higher education that reliably enables traditionally underserved students to earn an affordable bachelor's degree in as little as two years, leading to a great first job and…

Education
2
Resources for Community Development

Resources for community development creates and preserves affordable housing for people with the fewest options, to build community and enrich lives.

—
3
Ridge Point Non-Profit Housing Corporation

To provide affordable housing to low-income households in the greater san francisco bay area.

Housing & Shelter
4
Housing Trust Silicon Valley

Our mission at housing trust silicon valley, is to use transformative housing finance and public and private partnerships to create more equitable and affordable communities.

Housing & Shelter
5
Sacramento Region Community Foundation

The Sacramento Region Community Foundation leads, serves, and inspires enduring philanthropy for a just and vibrant Sacramento region.

Philanthropy
6
California Housing Partner Corporation

The California Housing Partnership Corporation creates and preserves affordable and sustainable homes for Californians with low incomes by providing expert financial and policy solutions to nonprofit and public partners.

Unclassified
7
Uc Riverside Foundation

To support educational, research and public functions and programs of the riverside campus of the university of california.

Education
8
Alameda Education Foundation

AEF serves as a critical bridge toward equitable and inclusive educational outcomes for Alameda TK-12 public school students.

—
9
Rubicon Programs Inc

Rubicon's mission is to create and deliver integrated solutions to make a positive and lasting impact on people living in poverty and empower people to move out of poverty and improve their quality of life.

—
10
Renaissance Heights Foundation

The organization is dedicated to the vision that everyone deserves the opportunity to live and raise their families in communities and can achieve their full potential. The mission is to empower the residents of Renaissance Heights by…

Community Improvement
11
Regional Economic Community Action Program Inc

Recap empowers people and communities challenged by poverty, racism, and social injustice by collaborating with public and private partners to provide high quality health and human services, education, advocacy, and hope. our mission is…

Human Services
12
Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco Inc

The Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco is dedicated to combating the displacement crisis gripping our city by building the power of working-class tenants of color to take on the real estate industry and win housing justice for all.…

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Richmond Promise Inc; the most unlike its peers is The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation. 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

16 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. 16 of the 21 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
15/16
Grantees still filing
9/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WEST CONTRA COSTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT: $1,468,020 · OtherWEST CONTRA COSTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICTTHE GLEN PRICE GROUP: $92,000 · OtherTHE GLEN PRICE GROUP+8 more: $84,465 · OtherRichmond Community Foundation: $705,800 · PhilanthropyRichmond Community FoundationPARTNERS IN SCHOOL INNOVATION: $344,000 · PhilanthropyPARTNERS IN SCHOOL INNOVATIONTHE WILLIAM & FLORA HEWLETT FOUNDATION: $64,019 · PhilanthropyTHE WILLIAM & FLORA HEWLETT FOU…+1 more: $7,000 · PhilanthropyCommunity Financial Resources: $764,829 · Public BenefitCommunity Financial R…RICHMOND LAND: $249,962 · Community ImprovementRICHMOND PROMISE INC: $60,000 · EducationBEAM FOUNDATION: $46,000 · EducationASPIRE EDUCATION PROJECT: $15,000 · EducationBAY AREA COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $114,500 · HealthYoung Men's Christian Association of the East Bay: $8,000 · Human Services
Other$1,644,485Philanthropy$1,120,819Public Benefit$764,829Community Improvement$249,962Education$121,000Health$114,500Human Services$8,000

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 budgetCommunity Financial Resources: $764,829 over 4y, 50% of budgetRichmond Community Foundation: $705,800 over 3y, 8.7% of budgetPARTNERS IN SCHOOL INNOVATION: $344,000 over 2y, 3.4% of budgetRICHMOND LAND: $249,962 over 1y, 29% of budgetBAY AREA COMMUNITY RESOURCES INC: $114,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetTHE WILLIAM & FLORA HEWLETT FOUNDATION: $64,019 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRICHMOND PROMISE INC: $60,000 over 2y, 3.4% of budgetASPIRE EDUCATION PROJECT: $15,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetRICHMOND NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetCOMMUNITY HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORP OF NORTH RICHMOND: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE OF OAKLAND: $8,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYoung Men's Christian Association of the East Bay: $8,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRichmond Art Center: $7,200 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFOUNDATION FOR STUDENTS RISING ABOVE: $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetONEGOAL: $6,000 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.

East Bay Community Fo…The San Francisco Fou…Silicon Valley Commun…Richmond Community Fo…Chamberlin Education …United Way of the Bay…The California Endowm…Kaiser Foundation Hos…Dean and Margaret Les…Justice Justice Found…Chamberlin Family Phi…The Morris Stulsaft F…
East Bay Community FoundationCA26.5× affinity11 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 · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Richmond Community Foundation · Chamberlin Education Foundation · United Way of the Bay Area · The California Endowment · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Dean and Margaret Lesher Foundation · Justice Justice Foundation · Chamberlin Family Philanthropy · The Morris Stulsaft 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 West Contra Costa Public Education Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from West Contra Costa Public Education Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report 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 21 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 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 West Contra Costa Public Education’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