How much did ALLEN FAMILY PHILANTHROPIES grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 47% of ALLEN FAMILY PHILANTHROPIES’s grantee dollars go to organizations outside the IRS cause taxonomy (common for large international and research funders), so a chart would be mostly “unclassified” and misrepresent the portfolio.

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

conduct legallegal proceedingsproceedings federalfederal coalcoal leasingreplication educationalmuseum

2019

katwanoaafeedbackassisted coralcoral genedemocratic republicrepublic congo

2020

north kivudemocratic republicrepublic congoartsreliefhealth zonecovid pandemic

2021

covid nativenative crisiscrisis responsecovid vaccinesviableoptionfinal experiments

2022

spirit seasonafrican elephantprotein lifespanspatialtitledproteinsaccelerator learning

2023

spirit seasonendangeredcoastalrenewalextracellular vesiclessciencehawaiian

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 110 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k12 grants · $35k
$10k–50k14 grants · $416k
$50k–250k23 grants · $3.6M
$250k+61 grants · $52M

$300,000

Median grant

States reached

$1.4B

Total assets

Largest grants

ARTSFUND$10,422,623
CHILDRENS HOSPITAL CORPORATION$2,500,000
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT SAN DIEGO$2,500,000
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION$2,500,000
ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI$2,500,000
NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC SOCIETY$1,763,533
FRIENDS OF SEATTLE WATERFRONT$1,518,612
FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION INC$1,435,763
THE EARTHSHOT PRIZE$1,276,100
AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION INC$1,250,000
SUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION$1,042,500
ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPY ADVISORS INC$1,000,000
CHANCELLOR MASTERS & SCHOLARS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD$800,000
EARTH GENOME$763,083
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE ROYAL FOUNDATION OF THE DUKE AND DUCHESS$750,000

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–24, $666k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15% — the area typically sits at 10%. 76% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.

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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 11% of ALLEN FAMILY PHILANTHROPIES’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 37% of the giving stays in WA; read by stated purpose it is 31% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

ALLEN FAMILY PHILANTHROPIESlessmore of its giving

Placed by recipient address · 14% directed abroad (not shown)

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$355M · 166 repeat orgs$36M to everyone else

166 repeat relationships — 65 still active in FY2024, 101 since wound down; 29 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

166

118

Total granted

$355M

$25M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%

+69%

Still filing today

59%

38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 81% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $11M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

EducationArts & CultureEnvironmentHealthHuman ServicesAnimalsOther

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

UO
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION
8× · 2017–2024 · $37M · revenue +36%
A
ARTSFUND
5× · 2020–2024 · $21M · revenue +212% · 64% of their budget
CH
CHILDRENS HOSPITAL CORPORATION
8× · 2017–2024 · $20M · revenue +57%

Funded once

LC
LIVING COMPUTER MUSEUM LAB
one grant, 2018 · $2.1M
FH
FLYING HERITAGE AND COMBAT ARMOR MUSEUM
one grant, 2018 · $1.8M · revenue -100%
AF
AMERICAN FRIENDS OF THE ROYAL FOUNDATION OF THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF CAMBRID
one grant, 2020 · $1.3M

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

Seattle Pacific University

Seattle Pacific University is a Christian university fully committed to engaging the culture and changing the world by graduating people of competence and character, becoming people of wisdom, and modeling grace-filled community.

Education

Washington College

Washington college challenges and inspires emerging citizen leaders to discover lives of purpose and passion.

Education

The George Washington University

Education and research

Education

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

The howard hughes medical institute is a philanthropy that serves society through the direct conduct of biomedical research and support for programs in science education.

Health

University of Portland

The University of Portland, an independently governed Catholic university guided by the Congregation of Holy Cross, addresses significant questions of human concern through interdisciplinary studies of the arts, sciences, and humanities…

Education

New York Academy of Sciences

To advance scientific knowledge and to increase the number of scientifically informed individuals.

—

Westminster University

Offer undergraduate and graduate degrees in liberal arts and professional programs.

Education

University of California

To raise and manage private funds to support uci's broader mission of excellence in teaching, research and public service.

Education

Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute

—

Washington Research Foundation

Health

Washington University Medical Center

To provide and assist its member organizations in providing hospital facilities, physical properties, and programs appropriate for the care and treatment of patients, for the continued on Schedule O

—

United States Naval Institute

To advance professional, literary, and scientific understanding of sea power.

—

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Seattle Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Treehouse. 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.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 33 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.6% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.6%1/173

the rest of the field

11%

206,163/1,819,392

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.

06the grantee network

165 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

163/165

Grantees still filing

142/165

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$194,694,208Education$100,961,008Health$29,266,174Arts & Culture$29,163,974Philanthropy$16,771,718Environment$14,535,212Animals$5,239,254

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.

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.

Seattle FoundationWA51× affinity37 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seattle Foundation · Gates Foundation · Artsfund · United Way of King County · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Raikes Foundation · Grousemont Foundation · The Satterberg Foundation Inc · Seattle Seahawks Charitable Foundation · Inatai Foundation · School's Out Washington · Moccasin Lake 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 organisation ALLEN FAMILY PHILANTHROPIES 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

3get no government money at all

1rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: RHIZOME ACTION NETWORK INC.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

high risk

~1 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 3 filed years.

Track record & reputation

medium risk

3 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 45.9× since.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 871985174 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on RHIZOME ACTION NETWORK INC, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 1 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 75% of their budget — load-bearing; a dependency Plinth would track.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Allen Family Philanthropies?

Find your warmest path to Allen Family Philanthropies through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

ALLEN FAMILY PHILANTHROPIES

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

165 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Allen Family Philanthropies?

More from the funding graph

ALLEN FAMILY PHILANTHROPIES

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Where the work is directed

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

165 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Allen Family Philanthropies?

More from the funding graph