Skip to content
William E and Aenid R Weisgerber Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

William E and Aenid R Weisgerber 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.

$361k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$160k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Health$1.8MEducation$40kPublic Safety & Disaster$35kCommunity Improvement$10kArts & Culture$5kYouth Development$5kInternational$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $30k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $306k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$4.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
California Pacific Medical Center Foundation$160,000
Lucile Packard Foundation for Children's Health$86,400
Diabetes Youth Families$60,000
American Red Cross$25,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
Partners in Health$5,000
San Francisco Chamber of Commerce Foundation$5,000
KQED$5,000
San Francisco Chamber of Commerce Foundation$5,000
Dream Volunteers$5,000
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 (FY24–25, $30k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%American Red Cross: $25k → 10%American Red Cross: $5k → 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.8M · 7 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
5

Total granted

$1.8M
$30k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+135%

Still filing today

71%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k 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
HealthRecreation & SportsHuman ServicesArts & CultureEducationOther
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

  • CP
    CALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION
    6× · 2020–2025 · $964k · revenue +112%
  • LP
    LUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH
    6× · 2020–2025 · $518k · revenue +8%
  • AN
    American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches
    3× · 2023–2025 · $35k · revenue +22%

Funded once

  • THE SAN FRANCISCO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2025 · $10k · revenue +135%
  • PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
    one grant, 2025 · $5k · revenue 0%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2025 · $5k
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
Ucsf Foundation Investment Company

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

Education
2
Kaiser Foundation for the Advancement of Integrated Health Care

Kaiser foundation for the advancement of integrated health care is a nonprofit 501(c)(4) advocacy organization to engage in proactive advocacy to promote understanding of the benefits of integrated care and coverage, and support of the…

Health
3
Sutter Bay Hospitals

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
4
Kfhpw Holdings

Supporting kaiser permanente organizations which provide high-quality, affordable health care services to improve the health of our members and the communities we serve.

—
5
Sutter 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
6
Mills-Peninsula Hospital 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
7
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
8
Kaiser Permanente Bernard J Tyson School of Medicine Inc

Provide a world-class medical education that ignites a passion for learning, desire to serve & commitment to improve the health & well-being of patients & communities.

Education
9
Sutter Auburn Faith Hospital 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
The San Francisco School

A private school that cultivates and celebrates the intellectual, imaginative, and humanitarian promise of each student in a community that practices mutual respect, embraces diversity, and inspires passion for learning.

—
11
Children's Hospital Los Angeles

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

Health
12
Dominican University of California

Our institutional mission is to educate and prepare students to be ethical leaders and socially responsible global citizens who incorporate the dominican values of study, reflection, community and service into their lives.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is California Pacific Medical Center Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation. 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

9 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. 9 of the 12 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)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $964,000 · HealthCALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATIONLUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH: $518,400 · HealthLUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH+1 more: $5,000 · HealthDYF: $190,000 · Recreation & SportsDYFDiabetic Youth Families: $80,000 · OtherSACRED HEART SCHOOLS ATHERTON: $30,000 · OtherSt Anne School: $10,000 · OtherTHE SAN FRANCISCO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE FOUNDATION: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $35,000 · Human ServicesKQED INC: $5,000 · Arts & CultureDREAM VOLUNTEERS: $5,000 · Education
Health$1,487,400Recreation & Sports$190,000Other$135,000Human Services$35,000Arts & Culture$5,000Education$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCALIFORNIA PACIFIC MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $964,000 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetLUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION FOR CHILDREN'S HEALTH: $518,400 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetDYF: $190,000 over 4y, 2.1% of budgetAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches: $35,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSt Anne School: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetKQED INC: $5,000 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.

American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE7.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 William E and Aenid R Weisgerber Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from William E and Aenid R Weisgerber Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
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 William E and Aenid R Weisgerber Foundation?

Find your warmest path to William E and Aenid R Weisgerber 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 12 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 William E and Aenid R Weisgerber’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