Skip to content
Atwood Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Atwood Foundation

Its FY2018 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$4.6M
Granted FY2018
16
Grants FY2018
1
States reached
$2.1M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2018.

Environment$3.9MHuman Services$321kEducation$235kHealth$155kYouth Development$110kArts & Culture$61kSocial Science$12kHousing & Shelter$11kOther$0
02FY2018 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2018

  • $10k–50k4 grants · $60k
  • $50k–250k10 grants · $895k
  • $250k+2 grants · $3.7M
$100,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ROCKFORD PARK DISTRICT FOUNDATION$2,139,956
WINNEBAGO COUNTRY FOREST PRESERVE$1,515,989
YMCA OF ROCK RIVER VALLEY$140,000
KEITH COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL$125,000
NORTHWEST COMMUNITY CENTER$110,000
BARBARA OLSEN CNTR OF HOPE$110,000
ROCKFORD ROTARY CHARITABLE ASSOC$110,000
NATURAL LAND INSTITUTE$100,000
ROCKFORD UNIVERSITY$50,000
WESLEY WILLOWS$50,000
ANDERSON JAPANESE GARDENS$50,000
ROCKFORD ART MUSEUM$50,000
ROCK VALLEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION$30,000
BURPEE MUSEUM OF NAT HISTORY$10,000
THE HOWARD CENTER$10,000
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY18–18, $140k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%YMCA OF ROCK RIVER VALLEY: $140k → 15%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
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.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

61%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.9M · 11 repeat orgs$1.9M to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2018, 0 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2018 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
6

Total granted

$2.9M
$51k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+5%
+99%

Still filing today

73%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2018, 60% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.8M went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18
EnvironmentEducationHousing & ShelterArts & CultureHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • RP
    ROCKFORD PARK DISTRICT FOUNDATION
    2× · 2017–2018 · $2.2M · revenue +55% · 59% of their budget
  • RU
    ROCKFORD UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2017–2018 · $65k · revenue +5%
  • WW
    WESLEY WILLOWS
    2× · 2017–2018 · $51k · revenue +35%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • HF
    HABITAT FOR HUM ROCKFORD
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • WC
    WINNEBAGO COUNTRY FARM BUREAU FND
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
How this is measured

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

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Transform Rockford
Community Improvement
2
Rockford Promise

Vision statement: enhance economic vitality in the rockford region by providing access to post-secondary education for all rockford public school graduates. - mission statement: remove financial barriers by offering full-tuition…

Education
3
Rockford Christian Education Association

To challenge young people to know christ as lord, apply god's truth in all areas of life, love others sacrifically, and achieve the highest level of knowledge and skill in order to serve god and others

Education
4
The Rockford Institute

To provide analysis and commentary on cultural, economic, political, and educational issues through a published monthly opinion magazine and to operate continuing adult educational conferences in american and european literature and…

—
5
Rockford Day Nursery

It is the mission of this corporation to provide quality care for children between the ages of six weeks and twelve years whose parents are employed or in training.

Human Services
6
Rockford Municipal Employees Credit Union

Our purpose is to provide financial services to our members with competitive rates while maintaining our financial stability.

—
7
Rockford Area Economic Development Council Inc

The rockford area economic development council cultivates opportunities for primary job growth that increase the economic well-being of our region

—
8
Rockford Charter School Organization

To empower our students to become global leaders who connect, explore, and create through real-world learning experiences.

Education
9
Rocky Mountain College

Rocky mountain college educates future leaders through liberal arts and professional programs that cultivate critical thinking, creative expression, ethical decision making, informed citizenship, and professional excellence.

Education
10
Rockford Area Strategic Initiatives

The primary role of the rockford area strategic initiative is to enhance education, commerce, trade and economic development in the rockford region

Community Improvement
11
Rockford Area Community Endowment

Rockford area community endowment is a local foundation committed to assisting rockford area residents, businesses, government and volunteer organizations to expand opportunities locally. race was founded in 1964.

Philanthropy
12
Rock River Repertory Theatre

Inspire artists, audiences, and our greater southern wisconsin community to celabrate the art of theatre.

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rockford University; the most unlike its peers is Natural Land Institute. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

13 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 22 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
8/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ROCKFORD PARK DISTRICT FOUNDATION: $2,199,956 · EnvironmentROCKFORD PARK DISTRICT FOUNDATIONNATURAL LAND INSTITUTE: $110,000 · Environment+2 more: $60,000 · EnvironmentWINNEBAGO COUNTRY FOREST PRESERVE: $1,515,989 · OtherWINNEBAGO COUNTRY FOREST PRESERVEBARBARA OLSEN CNTR OF HOPE: $135,000 · OtherBARBARA OLSEN CNTR OF HOPEKEITH COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL: $130,000 · OtherKEITH COUNTRY DAY SCHOOLNORTHWEST COMMUNITY CENTER: $120,000 · OtherNORTHWEST COMMUNITY CENTER+7 more: $82,000 · OtherYMCA OF ROCK RIVER VALLEY: $140,000 · Human ServicesROCKFORD ROTARY CHARITABLE ASSOCIATION: $110,000 · Community ImprovementROCKFORD UNIVERSITY: $65,000 · EducationROCK VALLEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $40,000 · EducationWESLEY WILLOWS: $51,000 · Housing & Shelter+1 more: $1,000 · Housing & ShelterROCKFORD ART MUSEUM: $51,000 · Arts & Culture
Environment$2,369,956Other$1,982,989Human Services$140,000Community Improvement$110,000Education$105,000Housing & Shelter$52,000Arts & Culture$51,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetROCKFORD PARK DISTRICT FOUNDATION: $2,199,956 over 2y, 59% of budgetYMCA OF ROCK RIVER VALLEY: $140,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetKEITH COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL: $130,000 over 2y, 3.6% of budgetNATURAL LAND INSTITUTE: $110,000 over 2y, 5.4% of budgetROCKFORD UNIVERSITY: $65,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWESLEY WILLOWS: $51,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetROCKFORD ART MUSEUM: $51,000 over 2y, 8.2% of budgetANDERSON GARDENS: $50,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetROCK VALLEY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetKEEP NORTHERN ILLINOIS BEAUTIFUL: $10,000 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetSHELTER CARE MINISTRIES: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Community Foundation …Bergstrom Inc Charita…The Kjellstrom Family…Tracy E Anderson Char…John & Linda Anderson…Goddard Family Founda…Sjostrom & Sons Found…Guy Reno Family Found…The Ben Harding Famil…The David & Colleen A…Jeff and Shelley Shin…Nancy Nichols Olson F…
Community Foundation of Northern ILIL26.2× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Northern IL · Bergstrom Inc Charitable Foundation Xxxxx2008 · The Kjellstrom Family Foundation · Tracy E Anderson Charitable Foundation · John & Linda Anderson Charitable Foundation · Goddard Family Foundation · Sjostrom & Sons Foundation · Guy Reno Family Foundation · The Ben Harding Family Foundation · The David & Colleen Anderson Charitable Foundation · Jeff and Shelley Shinn Foundation · Nancy Nichols Olson Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Atwood Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Atwood Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 22 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2018, released 2018. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Atwood’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home