California · Nonprofit
143 COLLECTIVE
143 COLLECTIVE (California) receives grants from 3 organizations whose IRS filings report $102,500 to it, the largest being Schwab Charitable Fund ($59,500). 2 of them have funded it in more than one year, and 58% of the money arrives through donor-advised or pass-through sponsors rather than from an institution directly.
Against its field
143 COLLECTIVE runs a healthier operating margin than half of the 7,170 philanthropy nonprofits its size.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 7,170 philanthropy nonprofits under $100k, FY2024
Three funders worth looking at
Grantmakers with no record of funding this organization, ranked by how strongly the co-funder graph and the mission embeddings agree. The evidence is in section 03.
- Helen C Cole Charitable Trustshared funders
- Retailroi Incportfolio match
- Michael Klein Foundationportfolio match
The organization over time
Each line starts at 100 in 2021, so what you read is the shape rather than the size: 150 means half as much again as 2021, 50 means half. The number beside each label in the key is where it ended. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
How it's funded, over time
Each bar is one year's revenue split into where it came from, and every bar is the same height — these are shares, not amounts, so a year that raised twice as much looks the same size. Hover a bar for the split.
100% of 143 COLLECTIVE’s revenue is contributions — more donation-reliant than the typical peer (95% for the typical peer).
Surplus & reserves
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 3 of the last 4 reported years ran a deficit.
reserve
Who funds it, year by year
2022 → 2023: the base broadened from 2 funders to 3 funders, grant income rose $31k → $34k.
1 of 3 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 58% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.
From the IRS filings of 143 COLLECTIVE’s funders (the co-funder graph). Association, not causation. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.
How concentrated its funding is
143 COLLECTIVE leans on a few funders — its largest provides 58% of grant income and the top three 100%; half comes from just 1 funder.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 1 funder to its left
58% of the income these shares are computed over arrives through pass-through sponsors or from payers whose filings do not say what kind of payment it is. Concentration is still measured over all of it, because the money is real; what it does not support is a claim about how many institutions have chosen to fund 143 COLLECTIVE.
Largest funder’s share by year: 2022 81% · 2023 53% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.
Where its funders are
58% of 143 COLLECTIVE's grant income arrives through donor-advised or pass-through sponsors, whose addresses record where the money is held rather than where the donor is. Of the $43k that is directly attributable, 100% of it comes from funders outside California, across 2 states.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Funder states come from each funder’s own filing. $60k arriving through sponsors registered in 1 state is excluded from the map and the split above: a sponsor holds money on a donor’s behalf, so its registered address would place those dollars somewhere no donor need ever have been. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.
Funders to approach
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first.
- Helen C Cole Charitable Trustshared fundersOH · backs 4 organizations that share your funders
- Retailroi Incportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Michael Klein Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- doTERRA Healing Hands Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Kengena Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- The Wfg Foundation Incportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Sholl-Freede Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Klintworth Family Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- The Kurtz Foundation Incportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Grace Hospice Foundation Incportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Berns Team Blessings Incportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Traders4acauseportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Organizations like 143 COLLECTIVE
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
In California
Nationally
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
Public support
0%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Footprint & structure
Files a return copy in 1 state
Screen this organization
A dated, signed PDF of the compliance screen for 143 COLLECTIVE: IRS status (Business Master File, Publication 78, auto-revocation), the OFAC sanctions lists, the Internal Revenue Bulletin, and California registration, with the Rev. Proc. 2018-32 §8.01 reliance elements stated element by element. Generated from the current files at the moment you download it.
Screens are triage, not determinations; a source that cannot be read reports not screened, never clear. How the screen works · on the API as GET /api/screening/{ein}?format=pdf
Questions and answers
- Who funds 143 COLLECTIVE?
- 143 COLLECTIVE (California) receives grants from 3 organizations whose IRS filings report $102,500 to it, the largest being Schwab Charitable Fund ($59,500). 2 of them have funded it in more than one year, and 58% of the money arrives through donor-advised or pass-through sponsors rather than from an institution directly.
- How many funders does 143 COLLECTIVE have?
- IRS filings report 3 organizations giving $102,500 in grants to 143 COLLECTIVE, 2 of which have funded it in more than one year.
- Who is the largest funder of 143 COLLECTIVE?
- Schwab Charitable Fund is the largest funder on record, with $59,500 in grants. The full list of funders is on this page.
- How can an organization like 143 COLLECTIVE find more funders?
- Start with the funders already giving here, then look at the foundations that back similar organizations in California. The funding by cause and by state pages list the largest funders for a given area and how to approach them.
These figures are read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML: this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2021–2024), and the filings of 3funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. Trends on this page end at FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving; later years are shown and marked, and move no figure. Data on this page was exported August 27, 2026. What this page cannot tell you · view filing