Our Little Light Foundation

Our Little Light Foundation is a small, family-run private foundation (President Kathryn W Carlsen, CFO Dale R Carlsen, Secretary Beth M Carlsen — all uncompensated) based in Roseville, CA, founded by the Carlsen family with a $9.5M founding contribution in 2014. It is not a large, staffed institution — expect personal, relationship-driven decision-making rather than a program-officer bureaucracy. The foundation's 27-grant DB sample and web-reported activity both show a strong, consistent preference for direct-service nonprofits working with foster youth, at-risk children, and families in crisis, heavily concentrated in California (25 of 27 tracked grants) with occasional out-of-state exceptions (IL, MA, and per Instrumentl, VA and NY in other years). First-time applicants should not expect a public RFP or portal: the process starts with an email to Grants@OurLittleLightFoundation.org requesting an Application Packet, followed by submission of the correct form (new vs. returning applicant) plus a full narrative proposal. Because support 'is primarily provided for existing and sustainable programs,' organizations with at least one to two years of track record and measurable outcomes have a real edge — brand-new, unproven programs are considered only 'on a case by case basis.' The foundation's own restrictions language emphasizes an 'established ethical reputation' and explicitly allows letters of recommendation from established partners to substitute for a long track record, which favors organizations that can show community validation (partnerships, referrals, co-funding from CASA networks, university foundations, or other funders in the child-welfare space) even if they're newer. Grant sizes skew toward the $10,000-$50,000 mid-tier ($25,000 median per DB typical_grant_size data), with occasional larger, capacity-building-scale awards (UC Davis Foundation $230,000; UC Regents $160,000; Yolo Crisis Nursery $200,000 across two grants) reserved for institutional partners with proven infrastructure. Given the tiny, family-run governance structure and $0 officer compensation, expect slow, informal communication — budget extra follow-up time and consider a warm introduction through an existing grantee (e.g., CASA of Los Angeles, Koinonia Family Services, or First Star) if possible.

Based on the DB's 27-grant sample (2019-2024 era filings), median grant size is $25,000, average is $44,815 (skewed upward by a few large awards), and the range runs from $5,000 (Alliance for Children's Rights) to $230,000 (Uc Davis Foundation, CIRCLE clinic). The foundation's own reported typical_grant_size metadata (16-grant subset) shows median $25,000, average $39,688, min $10,000, max $160,000 — consistent with a foundation that makes most grants in the $10K-$50K band and reserves six-figure checks for a handful of flagship partners. Total tracked giving in the DB sample is $1,210,000 across 27 grants. Annual giving has been remarkably stable for a decade: $700,598 (2020), $651,100 (2021), $617,113 (2022), rising modestly to an estimated $591,146 (2024, per web data) and $631,000 (2025, per web data, 18 grants). Grant counts fluctuate more than dollar totals — 23 grants in 2024 vs. 18 in 2025 — suggesting the foundation trades off between funding more organizations at smaller amounts versus fewer at larger amounts, without a fixed formula. Total assets have declined slowly from $9.93M (2014, the year of the $9.5M founding gift) to $9.19M (2024), consistent with a foundation spending down net investment income plus a modest principal draw rather than aggressive growth. Geographically, the DB sample is 93% California (25 of 27 grants), with single grants to Illinois and Massachusetts. By program theme, foster care/child welfare and CASA-style advocacy dominate: of the top 25 grantees, at least 10 explicitly serve foster youth or the child welfare system (Yolo Crisis Nursery, UC Regents foster care resilience, Koinonia Family Services, CASA of LA, California CASA, CASA of Monterey County, A Sense of Home, Camp To Belong, Guardian Scholars programs at LACC and First Star, Stanford Sierra Youth Solutions). Education/youth-development grants (Community Grows, Improve Your Tomorrow, Project Access Resource Centers, Strive LA, Big Brothers Big Sisters of Sacramento) and family-crisis/homelessness services (St John's Program, Family House, Powerhouse Ministry) make up most of the remainder, with smaller allocations to health (Healthy Smiles of Orange County) and immigrant children's legal rights (Young Center).

Our Little Light Foundation sits among a cluster of similarly-sized ($9.1-9.2M asset) family and small private foundations classified under Philanthropy & Grantmaking. Unlike most of its listed peers, it maintains an active public-facing website with a defined application process, which is itself a differentiator in this peer set.

Four of the five closest asset-matched peers have no discoverable website or public application process, making Our Little Light Foundation comparatively more accessible despite still being an invitation-light, relationship-driven funder. Its distinguishing trait versus this peer group is a clear, narrow thematic focus (foster care/child welfare/family crisis in California) rather than the generic, undefined 'Philanthropy & Grantmaking' classification shared by all six — grant seekers should treat the explicit foster-care and CASA concentration as the real signal, since the NTEE code alone doesn't differentiate this group.

No dedicated press releases, leadership changes, or program announcements were found for Our Little Light Foundation in 2025-2026 — the foundation does not maintain a news or blog section, and its website footer is still dated 2023, indicating minimal digital upkeep. Leadership has remained stable and unchanged for years: Kathryn W Carlsen (President), Dale R Carlsen (CFO), and Beth M Carlsen (Secretary) continue to serve as the foundation's sole officers, all uncompensated, consistent with a hands-on family foundation model rather than a professionally staffed one. The most concrete 'recent activity' signal available is aggregated 990-PF filing data: an estimated $631,000 distributed across 18 grants in 2025, following $591,146 across 23 grants in 2024. This represents a continuation of the foundation's decade-long giving pattern rather than any strategic pivot — dollar totals have hovered in the $490K-$710K range every year since 2019, with no reported multi-year campaign, capital initiative, or new program area. The largest known recent grant in the DB sample, $230,000 to UC Davis Foundation for the CIRCLE clinic, and $200,000 across two grants to Yolo Crisis Nursery, both point to an ongoing relationship-based strategy of concentrating meaningful dollars in a small number of trusted institutional partners (universities, established crisis-care nonprofits) while distributing smaller five-figure grants more broadly across CASA chapters and youth-serving nonprofits. Grant seekers should not expect a public announcement of a new RFP cycle or shifted priorities — the most reliable way to track any changes is direct email contact with Grants@OurLittleLightFoundation.org ahead of the Q4 application window.

Initiate contact by email — send a brief inquiry to Grants@OurLittleLightFoundation.org requesting an Application Packet well before the fourth quarter, since that is the foundation's stated window for applications considered for the following calendar year (application_deadline on file: December 31). Because this is a three-person family foundation with no paid staff, do not expect rapid turnaround; build in months, not weeks, for a response. Identify yourself correctly on the form — use the 'New Grant Applicant Form' for a first request and the 'Returning Grant Applicant Form' if your organization has received funding before; using the wrong form signals inattention to their process. In the proposal, explicitly state what percentage of the requested grant will go to direct services versus administration — the foundation caps admin costs at 10% and asks for this breakdown by name in its instructions, so surface it prominently rather than burying it in a budget table. Lead with outcomes: because 'support is primarily provided for existing and sustainable programs,' emphasize your track record, number of children/youth/families served, and measurable results — new or unproven programs are a harder sell and considered only case-by-case. If you lack a long track record, substitute strength of community standing: the foundation explicitly accepts letters of recommendation from established partners as a credibility signal, so consider attaching one or two from respected child-welfare or education partners (e.g., a CASA chapter, a university foundation, or a peer nonprofit already funded by them, such as Koinonia Family Services or First Star). Align your language tightly to their stated mission — 'health, well-being, or education of children, youth, or families' — and quantify reach ('X children served,' 'Y families stabilized') the way their own instructions request. A common mistake to avoid: proposing to redirect funds from their approved use without pre-approval — the foundation requires prior written approval for any variance and periodic recaps on a set schedule, so build a simple reporting cadence into your proposal upfront to show you understand their compliance expectations. Given the geographic concentration (93% of the DB grant sample in California, mostly Sacramento-area and greater CA), organizations based outside California should expect a materially harder path unless they closely match past out-of-state exceptions (IL, MA) or offer a uniquely aligned national program like the Young Center's immigrant children's rights work.