California · Nonprofit
GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club
GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club (California) receives grants from 2 organizations whose IRS filings report $22,839 to it, the largest being PAYPAL Charitable Giving Fund ($22,697). 2 of them have funded it in more than one year, and 100% of the money arrives through donor-advised or pass-through sponsors rather than from an institution directly.
Against its field
GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club's revenue fell 75% between 2017 and 2025.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 16,609 education nonprofits under $100k, FY2025
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.
- Hacienda Child Development Fundportfolio match
- Coalition for Hope and Unityportfolio match
- Anderson Childrens Foundationportfolio match
The organization over time
Each line starts at 100 in 2017, so what you read is the shape rather than the size: 150 means half as much again as 2017, 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 GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club’s revenue is contributions — more reliant on donations than three-quarters of its peers (65% for the typical peer).
Surplus & reserves
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 6 of the last 9 reported years ran a deficit.
reserve
Who funds it, year by year
2020 → 2023: the base narrowed from 2 funders to 1 funder, grant income fell $16k → $65.
2 of 2 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 100% 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 GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club’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
GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club leans on a few funders — its largest provides 99% 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
100% 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 GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club.
Largest funder’s share by year: 2020 100% · 2021 100% · 2022 100% · 2023 100% — broadly stable.
“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
100% of GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club'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. Too little is directly attributable to place on a map.
Funder states come from each funder’s own filing. $23k arriving through sponsors registered in 2 statesis 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.
- Hacienda Child Development Fundportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Coalition for Hope and Unityportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Anderson Childrens Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- The Joseph & Katherine Castucci Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Pasadena Tournament of Roses Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Rotary District 5890 Charities Incportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Community Health & Education Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Shea Homes Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- East County Economic Development Councilportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Yli Believe Foundationportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Soboba Band of Luiseno Indiansportfolio matchits grantees resemble your mission
- Encinitas Rotary Club Foundationportfolio 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 GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club
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.
Where the money goes
85% of spending goes to programs.
Governance
Public support
100%
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 GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club: 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 GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club?
- GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club (California) receives grants from 2 organizations whose IRS filings report $22,839 to it, the largest being PAYPAL Charitable Giving Fund ($22,697). 2 of them have funded it in more than one year, and 100% of the money arrives through donor-advised or pass-through sponsors rather than from an institution directly.
- How many funders does GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club have?
- IRS filings report 2 organizations giving $22,839 in grants to GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club, 2 of which have funded it in more than one year.
- Who is the largest funder of GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club?
- PAYPAL Charitable Giving Fund is the largest funder on record, with $22,697 in grants. The full list of funders is on this page.
- How can an organization like GFWC - Temecula Valley Woman's Club 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 FY2025 (financials across 2017–2025), and the filings of 2funders 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