Skip to content
Beighle Family Foundation Co Randall P Beighle at a glance

· Private foundation

Beighle Family Foundation Co Randall P Beighle

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$500k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$265k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

80% of Beighle Family Foundation Co Randall P Beighle’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Schwab Charitable Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it.

Organizations named directly on the return

9
’17
9
’18
1
’19
2
’20
2
’21
0
’22
0
’23
0
’24
1
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Philanthropy$1.4MCivil Rights$1.0MFood & Nutrition$201kEnvironment$100kHousing & Shelter$100kHuman Services$55kEducation$41kHealth$40kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $50k–250k2 grants · $235k
  • $250k+1 grant · $265k
$135,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$4.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SCHWAB CHARITABLE FUND$265,000
PRIDE FOUNDATION$135,000
FOOD LIFELINE$100,000
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 (FY17–21, $101k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%LIFEWIRE: $25k → 9%LIFEWIRE: $20k → 9%LIFEWIRE: $5k → 9%WELLSPRING FAMILY SERVICES: $50k → 9%MINDFULNESS NORTHWEST: $1k → 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.

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$479k · 13 repeat orgs$234k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +6% since the first grant, against -6% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 12 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
9

Total granted

$479k
$234k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+6%
-6%

Still filing today

69%
56%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’25
Human ServicesFood & NutritionHealthEnvironmentCrime & LegalInternationalOther
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

  • FL
    FOOD LIFELINE
    2× · 2020–2025 · $160k · revenue +6%
  • L
    LifeWire
    3× · 2017–2019 · $50k · revenue +30%
  • SP
    SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $30k · revenue +10%

Funded once

  • UW
    UNITED WAY
    one grant, 2017 · $78k
  • WF
    WELLSPRING FAMILY SERVICES
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue -61%
  • BC
    BUILDING CHANGES
    one grant, 2021 · $50k · revenue +2%
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
Re Sources

RE Sources mobilizes people of Northwest Washington to build just and thriving communities and to protect the land, water, and climate on which we all depend.

Environment
2
Futurewise

Futurewise works throughout Washington state to encourage healthy, equitable and opportunity-rich communities, and to protect our most valuable farmlands, forests and water resources through wise land use policies and practices.

Environment
3
Disability Rights Washington

Disability rights washington's mission is to advance the dignity, equality, and self determination of people with disabilities. we work to pursue justice on matters related to human and legal rights.

Human Services
4
Washington Women's Foundation

Washington women's foundation is a strong and inclusive collective of informed women who together influence community transformation through individual and collective discovery, high-impact grant making and by listening to and respecting…

Philanthropy
5
Working Washington

We are workers, united across different industries to improve our working conditions and our lives. We come together as working people to build power through education, organizing, and enforcement. We work to raise and uphold standards in…

—
6
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
7
Earthcorps

To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.

International
8
Invest in Washington Now Campaign

Advocate for tax policy in Washington State

—
9
Fsc I&P

Fsc i&p promotes environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world's forests. this mission aligns with the forest stewardship council (fsc), its network of offices, and other organizations.…

Philanthropy
10
Gender Justice League

Gender Justice League's mission is to empower all people to eliminate discrimination and prejudice based on sex, gender identity, gender expression, and sexual orientation in Washington State, and to ensure that trans and gender diverse…

Civil Rights
11
Snoqualmie Valley Food Bank

Our mission is to provide food and key resources to help our neighbors and community thrive. we lead the effort to feed, educated and advocate ending hunger in the snoqualmie valley and beyond.

Food & Nutrition
12
Washington Wildlife & Recreation Coalition

Creating a greener, healthier, more equitable, and better Washington for all through community outreach, network building, and advocacy for conservation and outdoor recreation funding.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Building Changes; the most unlike its peers is The Pride Foundation. 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

16 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. 16 of the 24 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
16/16
Grantees still filing
9/16
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $1,359,000 · PhilanthropyDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC+1 more: $20,000 · PhilanthropyThe Pride Foundation: $975,000 · Civil RightsThe Pride FoundationFOOD LIFELINE: $160,000 · Food & NutritionEastWest Food Rescue: $40,000 · Food & NutritionUNITED WAY: $77,500 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD: $40,000 · OtherWashington Women in Need: $15,000 · OtherLEWIS & CLARK WOMEN'S SOCCER PROGRAM: $10,000 · OtherISSAQUAH SOCCER CLUB: $10,000 · OtherSOPHIA'S WAY: $10,000 · OtherSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $30,000 · OtherJUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF WASHINGTON: $22,500 · Other+5 more: $21,000 · OtherLifeWire: $50,000 · Human ServicesWELLSPRING FAMILY SERVICES: $50,000 · Human Services+1 more: $1,000 · Human ServicesFORTERRA NW: $100,000 · EnvironmentBUILDING CHANGES: $50,000 · HealthFRIENDS OF YOUTH: $5,000 · Health
Philanthropy$1,379,000Civil Rights$975,000Food & Nutrition$200,000Other$236,000Human Services$101,000Environment$100,000Health$55,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $1,359,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetThe Pride Foundation: $975,000 over 9y, 3.1% of budgetFOOD LIFELINE: $160,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetFORTERRA NW: $100,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetLifeWire: $50,000 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetWELLSPRING FAMILY SERVICES: $50,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBUILDING CHANGES: $50,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetEastWest Food Rescue: $40,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $30,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJUNIOR ACHIEVEMENT OF WASHINGTON: $22,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetWashington Women in Need: $15,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetISSAQUAH SOCCER CLUB: $10,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetISSAQUAH SCHOOLS FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF YOUTH: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMindfulness Northwest: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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 FoundationUnited Way of King Co…Puget Sound Energy Fo…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Aven FoundationGrousemont FoundationRaikes FoundationThe Satterberg Founda…The Norcliffe Foundat…Jpmorgan Chase Founda…Mightycause Charitabl…American Online Givin…
Seattle FoundationWA22.5× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seattle Foundation · United Way of King County · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Aven Foundation · Grousemont Foundation · Raikes Foundation · The Satterberg Foundation Inc · The Norcliffe Foundation · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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 Beighle Family Foundation Co Randall P Beighle funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Beighle Family Foundation Co Randall P Beighle. 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
    7report 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 24 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Beighle Family Foundation Co Randall P Beighle’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