Skip to content
Aurora Lilac Fund at a glance

· Private foundation

Aurora Lilac Fund

Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$46
Granted FY2020
1
Grants FY2020
1
States reached
$46
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0195% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2020.

Philanthropy$66kEducation$31kCommunity Improvement$12kInternational$2kReligion$1kHuman Services$1kHealth$600Employment$60Other$0
02FY2020 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$46
Median grant
1
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UW KUOW FUND$46
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–20) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY INSTITUTE: $7k → 9%ECONOMIC OPPURTUNITY INSTITUTE: $5k → 9%PEACETREES VIETNAM: $1k → 9%THRIVE WASHINGTON: $625 → 9%TECHNOLOGY ACCESS FOUNDATION: $3k → 9%PEACETREES VIETNAM: $500 → 9%GIVEBIG SEATTLE FDN: $12k → 9%SEATTLE GIRLS SCHOOL: $250 → 9%UW FDN: $15k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $10k → 9%REDEEMED BY THE BLOOD CHURCH: $1k → 9%REDEEMED BY THE BLOOD: $600 → 9%UW KUOW FUND: $1k → 9%UW KUOW FUND: $400 → 9%SOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS: $15k → 9%UW KUOW FUND: $46 → 9%WORKING WASHINGTON: $60 → 9%TINY TOTS DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $1k → 9%SOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS: $15k → 9%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.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$70k · 5 repeat orgs$20k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2020, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
9

Total granted

$70k
$20k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+46%
+52%

Still filing today

80%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20
EducationCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyInternationalOther
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

  • UO
    UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION
    2× · 2017–2018 · $25k · revenue +46%
  • EO
    Economic Opportunity Institute
    2× · 2017–2018 · $12k · revenue +35%
  • PV
    PEACETREES VIETNAM
    2× · 2017–2018 · $2k · revenue +253%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2018 · $12k
  • TECHNOLOGY ACCESS FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $3k · revenue +52%
  • EP
    EASTSIDE PATHWAYSgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $3k · revenue +52%
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
Washington Progress Fund

Washington Progress Fund is building a permanent and powerful social change movement in Washington state supported by a network of committed donors. WPF envisions a Washington state where government serves the public interest and we all…

Philanthropy
2
Invest in Washington Now Campaign

Advocate for tax policy in Washington State

—
3
Pathwaves Washington

Pathwaves Washington builds the collective power of leaders of color to transform early childhood systems so that every child and their community thrives.

Education
4
Clean Energy Transition Institute

The Clean Energy Transition Institute (CETI) is an independent, nonpartisan research and analysis nonprofit whose mission is to accelerate an equitable clean energy transition in the Northwest.

Education
5
Seattle Economic Development Fund Business Impact Nw

To provide economic development financing to serve the needs of small businesses in the state of washington that would not qualify for private financing under conventional financing criteria.

Community Improvement
6
Washington Ethnic Studies Now

Washington Ethnic Studies Now WAESN is a multigenerational majority POC-led nonprofit advancing Ethnic Studies and racial justice in Washington. We center people of color build youth-centered leadership and learning and organize…

Education
7
Bike Works Seattle

Bike Works promotes the bicycle as a vehicle for change to empower youth and build resilient communities.

Recreation & Sports
8
Washington State Family and Community Engagement Trust

Washington Family Engagement fosters social transformation by supporting the development of mulitgenerational leaders from diverse backgrounds to become actively engaged in schools and communities in Washington State.

Philanthropy
9
Artist Trust

Artist Trust supports the livelihoods of artists working in all disciplines to create a more vibrant and equitable Washington State.

Arts & Culture
10
Earthcorps

To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.

International
11
Seattle JazzED

Through Jazz education that liberates and inspires, Seattle JazzED increase access in the music room, celebrates student expression, and builds lasting connection rooted in community.

Arts & Culture
12
Washington Area Community Investment Fund Inc

The washington area community investment fund (wacif) is a nonprofit community loan fund focused on increasing equity and economic opportunity in the washington, dc area's underserved communities. wacif's mission is driven is driven by…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Thrive Washington; the most unlike its peers is Bank of America Charitable Gift Fd. 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

11 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. 11 of the 15 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BANK OF AMERICA CHARITABLE GIFT FD: $35,000 · PhilanthropyBANK OF AMERICA CHARITABLE GIFT FDSOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS: $30,000 · PhilanthropySOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERSUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $25,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON …EASTSIDE PATHWAYS: $2,500 · EducationEASTSIDE PATHWAYS+1 more: $250 · EducationIndividual grant recipient: $11,684 · OtherIndividual gra…UW KUOW FUND: $1,446 · OtherUW KUOW FUNDREDEEMED BY THE BLOOD CHURCH: $1,100 · OtherREDEEMED BY TH…TINY TOTS DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $1,000 · OtherTINY TOTS DEVE…THRIVE WASHINGTON: $625 · OtherREDEEMED BY THE BLOOD: $600 · Other+1 more: $60 · OtherEconomic Opportunity Institute: $11,613 · Community ImprovementEconomic Opp…TECHNOLOGY ACCESS FOUNDATION: $2,500 · Community ImprovementTECHNOLOGY A…PEACETREES VIETNAM: $1,770 · International
Philanthropy$65,000Education$27,750Other$16,515Community Improvement$14,113International$1,770

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSOCIAL VENTURE PARTNERS: $30,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $25,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEconomic Opportunity Institute: $11,613 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetTECHNOLOGY ACCESS FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEASTSIDE PATHWAYS: $2,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetPEACETREES VIETNAM: $1,770 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTINY TOTS DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHRIVE WASHINGTON: $625 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSEATTLE GIRLS' SCHOOL: $250 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Seattle FoundationGates FoundationDavid & Cathy Habib F…Ridge Road FoundationMedina FoundationUnited Way of King Co…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…The Bank of America C…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
Seattle FoundationWA20.8× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seattle Foundation · Gates Foundation · David & Cathy Habib Foundation · Ridge Road Foundation · Medina Foundation · United Way of King County · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Aurora Lilac Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Aurora Lilac Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Aurora Lilac Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Aurora Lilac Fund through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

    Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

    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 15 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Aurora Lilac’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