· Private foundation
Wurwand 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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
51% of Wurwand Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to The Jewish Community Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 52 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2020, the last year Wurwand Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 33 organizations, $2M. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2020
- Under $10k23 grants · $81k
- $10k–50k9 grants · $177k
- $50k–250k8 grants · $585k
- $250k+3 grants · $1.5M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| PACIFIC COMMUNITY VENTURES | $600,000 |
| TMC COMMUNITY CAPITAL | $500,000 |
| CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $440,000 |
| KCRW FOUNDATION | $125,000 |
| THE OPPORTUNITY FUND | $100,000 |
| JEWISH CENTER FOR JUSTICE | $85,000 |
| CSUN FOUNDATION | $75,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA | $50,000 |
| PUBLIC MEDIA GROUP OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA | $50,000 |
| SMALL BUSINESS MAJORITY | $50,000 |
| DIRECT RELIEF | $50,000 |
| ST JOSEPH CENTER | $35,000 |
| GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP NETWORK | $31,500 |
| CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $25,000 |
| LOS ANGELES REGIONAL FOOD BANK | $25,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY18–24, $1.6M) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
Which US states your grants reach
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +40% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.
75 repeat relationships — 33 still active in FY2020, 42 since wound down; 48 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call). Read against FY2020, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $73k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- TCTMC COMMUNITY CAPITAL3× · 2020–2024 · $750k · revenue +170% · 47% of their budget
- PCPACIFIC COMMUNITY VENTURES INC2× · 2020–2022 · $750k · revenue +155%
- JCJewish Center for Justice7× · 2018–2024 · $560k · revenue +276% · 40% of their budget
Funded once
- LILA-MAS INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $50k · revenue +45%
- TMTHE MAYOR'S FUND FOR LOS ANGELESone grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +10%
- MFMONTECITO FIREFIGHTERS CHARITABLE FOUNDATIONone grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue -68%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Chamber's mission: design and advance opportunities and solutions for a thriving regional economy that are inclusive and globally competitive. 1) advocacy - be a bold advocate for business as a driver of a strong economy that enables…
To improve the quality of life for the diverse communities we serve providing affordable and comprehensive healthcare and education in a welcoming multi-cultural environment.
The league of california community foundations promotes and strengthens community foundations in california. through collaboration and shared learning among member foundations and building partnerships with private and public entities, we…
The san diego foundation inspires enduring philanthropy and enables community solutions to improve the quality of life in our region.
Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…
The la conservation corps creates equitable opportunities for young people to build resilience in themselves, their communities and the environment through a program of work, education and support.
The L.A. Co-op Lab is a collective that builds capacity for worker ownership in Los Angeles as a pathway toward a more equitable and democratic economy.
The los angeles conservancy is a nonprofit membership organization that works through education and advocacy to recognize, preserve, and revitalize the historic architectural and cultural resources of los angeles county.
Meeting the professional needs of los angeles lawyers, and improving the administration of justice.
Promotion and advancement of children's health through patient care, research, and education.
To distribute public affairs and other educational information in order to create an electronic bridge between californians and their public officials, and, in the process educate a new generation of voting citizens and civic leaders who…
The university of la verne offers a distinctive and relevant educational experience to a diverse population of traditional-age, adult, and graduate learners, preparing them for successful careers and a commitment to lifelong learning…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Mayor's Fund for Los Angeles and the most unlike its peers is Jq International. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 30 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 1% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.9% lost their exemption, against 15% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
109 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 109 of the 138 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE JEWISH COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE OPPORTUNITY FUND ↗
- Who funds TMC COMMUNITY CAPITAL ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC COMMUNITY VENTURES INC ↗
- Who funds Jewish Center for Justice ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY NORTHRIDGE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds KCRW FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds SMALL BUSINESS MAJORITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds INCLUSIVE ACTION FOR THE CITY ↗
- Who funds DIRECT RELIEF ↗
- Who funds WOMEN'S ECONOMIC VENTURES ↗
- Who funds ST JOSEPH CENTER ↗
- Who funds The Rightway Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE LOS ANGELES FREE CLINIC ↗
- Who funds ACEVEDO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds UCLA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC MEDIA GROUP OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds DOWNTOWN WOMEN'S CENTER ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ↗
- Who funds GRID110 INC ↗
- Who funds MARTIN LUTHER KING JR COMMUNITY HEALTH FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds READY TO SUCCEED ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY LOS ANGELES AUXILIARY SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds FIRST STAR INC ↗
- Who funds Imagine Los Angeles Inc ↗
- Who funds ST JOHN'S COMMUNITY HEALTH ↗
- Who funds Multicultural Women Executive Leadership Foundation ↗
- Who funds SKIRBALL CULTURAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds The Village Family Services Inc ↗
- Who funds LOS ANGELES LGBT CENTER ↗
- Who funds ACCESSITY ↗
- Who funds EDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds VILLAGE FOR VETS ↗
- Who funds Lost Angels Childrens Project Inc ↗
- Who funds ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds LA-MAS INC ↗
- Who funds The Everychild Foundation ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: California Community Foundation · The Ralph M Parsons Foundation · Weingart Foundation · The Annenberg Foundation · Liberty Hill Foundation · Jewish Community Foundation of Los Angeles · Conrad N Hilton Foundation · The Ahmanson Foundation · Ccf Community Initiatives Fund · United Way Inc · The James Irvine Foundation · The Rose Hills Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Wurwand Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- The Petey Greene Program Inc — 29% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Wurwand Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Wurwand 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.