Audit shows $100 million from FireAid went to 197 charities; critics say survivors saw little direct aid

An audit commissioned by the Annenberg Foundation shows roughly $100 million raised at a star-studded benefit concert for Southern California wildfire relief was distributed to 197 charities, with little evidence the funds were paid directly to people who lost homes in the January blazes.

The FireAid event, which featured high-profile performers and celebrity supporters, raised the money for a fund managed by the Annenberg Foundation. Eight months after the concert, many displaced residents said they had not received direct cash assistance and expressed frustration that grants went to groups that provide a wide array of services beyond immediate survivor payouts.

The audit, completed by the law firm Latham & Watkins LLP at the foundation's request, lists the recipients and amounts and describes the range of programs funded. Among the grants cited in the report were $500,000 to the Music Health Alliance for mental-health care for musicians affected by the fires; $500,000 to the Center for Applied Ecological Remediation for post-fire bioremediation using fungi, beneficial microbes and native plants; $500,000 to Home Grown for cleaning and sanitation of preschools; and $250,000 to the Center for Nonprofit Management for workshops and training. Smaller grants included $100,000 to the Los Angeles Children’s Chorus for uniforms and supplies, and $100,000 to CAMP (Community Animal Wildfire Project) to provide free veterinary clinics for animals affected by the fires.

Organizers and the audit say the funds were awarded to organizations that the foundation vetted and that there was no evidence of misrepresentation in fundraising, improper selection of grantees or fraudulent intent. The audit was released after criticism from members of Congress and local residents demanding transparency about how the money raised at the benefit had been spent.

Critics, including residents who lost homes, said the level of detail about how organizations are actually using the grants remains insufficient. "There are a lot of people in our group chats who are like, ‘What’s the FireAid money being used for?’ Because I don’t think any of us have seen any of it,'" said Ben Einbinder, who has become a community organizer after losing his home in the Pacific Palisades. Pacific Palisades resident David Howard, whose house burned down, said the situation was "disheartening" and questioned the apparent disconnect between the fundraising message and where the money landed.

Some of the organizations that received grants are local relief groups and service providers. Others, the audit shows, are organizations whose work is not strictly direct cash assistance for survivors: for example, $100,000 to an organization that produces podcasts about the wildfires, $100,000 to a Buddhist relief charity, $100,000 to the NAACP Pasadena, $250,000 to the Los Angeles Black Worker Center, $200,000 to a group named My Tribe Rise, and $100,000 to the California Native Vote Project.

Local advocates also pointed to intermediary arrangements that reduced grant amounts available for program work. The audit notes that Pali Strong, a newly formed organization that received $500,000 in FireAid funds, used a fiscal sponsor, Community Partners, which takes a fee for administering grants to groups that are not themselves registered nonprofits. Community Partners charges roughly 9 percent for that service, meaning about $45,000 of the Pali Strong award went to administrative overhead before programming began, according to the reporting on the audit.

Organizers of FireAid previously said they did not promise direct cash disbursements to individual victims. Still, some residents and critics say performers and onstage messaging at the benefit created public expectations that survivors would receive direct financial relief. "When an artist goes on stage telling you that the money is going to go directly to the survivors of this disaster, and that’s not true, that’s a problem," Howard said.

The audit does not document how each grantee is deploying its FireAid funding in detail, and some local residents said that while they have seen examples of money reaching communities — such as a distribution of toys to preschool-age fire victims by an organization called Baby2Baby — they remain uncertain whether the full value of the raised funds is reaching survivors in proportion to need.

Some 10,000-plus Southern California residents lost homes in the January fires, which state and local officials have described as among the costliest natural disasters in California history. The Annenberg Foundation's disclosure of grants lists recipient organizations and amounts but, according to critics, has not fully answered questions about the pace of distribution or the extent to which awards are producing direct relief for displaced households.

The audit and the list of grantees responded to pressure from elected officials and community groups for transparency. Representatives including Kevin Kiley of California and Jim Jordan of Ohio had pressed for a detailed accounting after public concerns surfaced about how the FireAid proceeds were being used.

In a statement provided with the audit, the Annenberg Foundation emphasized the foundation's role in managing and vetting grants and directed further questions to the audit itself. The foundation and some beneficiary organizations said they intended their work to address both immediate and longer-term recovery needs, from mental-health supports and animal care to ecological restoration and nonprofit capacity building.

The disclosure of grants has not resolved tensions between organizers' stated aims and the expectations of some donors and survivors. Residents who lost homes say they seek clearer, verifiable information on how much direct assistance — cash or other urgent support — has been provided to households that experienced destruction, and on timelines for any future distributions intended specifically for survivors.

The audit represents a step toward transparency about how FireAid proceeds were allocated, but local advocates and some lawmakers say additional reporting from grantees on programmatic uses and direct assistance metrics will be necessary to assess whether the funds addressed the most urgent needs stemming from the January wildfires.