How much did COLLEGE SPARK WASHINGTON grant in FY2024?

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 74% of COLLEGE SPARK WASHINGTON’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

2020

remotemccabeflorestechnologydistance learningrapidplacement

2021

sdf salmonsalmon lifecycleoafcrm crmiteenscgp mathematicsco-requisite

2022

oaf oaflea esdleader planningesd leaderfuturesincreasingeef

2023

lea bothellbothell leaderlea esdleader planningesd leaderhei guidedguided pathways

2024

leader implementationeef reshapingreshaping humanitieshumanities curriculumeef eeflea leadervoice

2025

leader implementationcollaborativeleaderslea leadervoiceeef buildingnorthwest

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

03FY2024 · 47 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k9 grants · $13k
$10k–50k11 grants · $339k
$50k–250k23 grants · $2.1M
$250k+4 grants · $1.2M

$60,000

Median grant

States reached

$123M

Total assets

Largest grants

WASHINGTON STEM$360,000
TECHNOLOGY ACCESS FOUNDATION$300,000
EDUCATION SERVICE DISTRICT 105$300,000
SEIU HEALTHCARE 1199 NW MULTI-EMPLOYER TRAINING & EDUCATION FUND$250,000
NORTHEAST WA ESD 101$175,000
ONEAMERICA$150,000
PSESD 121$150,000
TACOMA COMMUNITY COLLEGE$121,000
EDUCATION SERVICE DISTRICT #105$120,000
EDUCATION SERVICE DISTRICT 189$100,000
EDUCATION SERVICE DISTRICT 112$100,000
CAPITAL REGION EDUCATION SERVICE DISTRICT (ESD 113)$100,000
EDUCATION NORTHWEST$100,000
RVC SEATTLE$90,000
TREEHOUSE$90,000

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 (FY21–24, $50k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9% — the area typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-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.

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.

69%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$14M · 56 repeat orgs$6.4M to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +36% since the first grant, against +16% for the ones you funded once.

56 repeat relationships — 27 still active in FY2024, 29 since wound down; 15 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$14M

$5.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%

+16%

Still filing today

36%

28%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 69% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.1M went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EducationCommunity ImprovementPhilanthropyYouth DevelopmentHuman ServicesPublic BenefitOther

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

DO
DEGREES OF CHANGE
3× · 2020–2024 · $1.0M · revenue +54%
TECHNOLOGY ACCESS FOUNDATION
3× · 2022–2024 · $510k · revenue +41%
RT
RENTON TECHNICAL COLLEGE
4× · 2020–2023 · $400k · revenue +124%

Funded once

OO
OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
one grant, 2020 · $1.1M
OO
OFFICE OF SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION
one grant, 2021 · $770k
CC
CLARK COLLEGE
one grant, 2020 · $245k

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.

Washington State University Foundation

The mission of the Foundation is to promote, accept, and maximize private support for programs, initiatives, and properties of Washington State University and its regional campuses. The Foundation also prudently manages, invests, and…

Education

Pacific Northwest University of Health Sciences

Pacific Northwest University of Health Sciences educates and trains health care professionals emphasizing service among rural and medically underserved communities throughout the Northwest.

Education

Foundation for the Seattle Colleges

The Foundation for the Seattle Colleges exists to advance fundraising efforts for the Seattle Community College District. We seek to attract financial resources which support students so they may be successful; maintain the quality and…

—

Impact Public Schools

To prepare a diverse student population to succeed in college & impact communities.

Education

Aft Washington

The Federation is affiliated with the Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO, and assists and represents local unions of teachers in the state of Washington in labor relations issues, organizes new units of teachers and other education…

—

Northwest Commission on Colleges and

Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities accredits institutions of higher education by applying evidence-informed standards and processes to support continuous improvements and promote equitable student achievement and success.

Education

Clean Energy Transition Institute

To accelerate an equitable clean energy transition in the Northwest by producing unbiased research and analysis framing economic decarbonization strategies and convening stakeholders to debate the tradeoffs in building the clean energy…

Education

Central Washington University Foundation

In partnership with cwu and our donors, our mission is to transform the lives of current and future generations of students by developing and stewarding resources that provide access, opportunity, and hope.

—

Economic Opportunity Institute

EOI works to make Washington state a national model of economic opportunity with an economy that truly works for everyone.

Community Improvement

Spokane Colleges Foundation

The community colleges of spokane foundation raises funds to support student access and educational excellence at community colleges of spokane.

Education

Peninsula College Foundation

Creating access, excellence and success for the peninsula college community by providing funds for students and programs.

Philanthropy

Innovation Spokane Schools

To prepare a diverse range of students for a life of learning in post-secondary education, citizenship, and leadership.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Education Northwest 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 32 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

0.0%0/46

the rest of the field

11%

2,902/26,143

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.

05the grantee network

42 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)

42/42

Grantees still filing

32/42

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$15,424,556Education$3,078,726Community Improvement$855,000Public Benefit$725,000Youth Development$280,000Philanthropy$215,000Employment$150,000

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 FoundationWA35.6× affinity19 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seattle Foundation · Gates Foundation · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · United Way of King County · Stolte Family Foundation · The Norcliffe Foundation · School's Out Washington · Inatai Foundation · Medina Foundation · Raikes Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund · Seattle Prof Engineering Employees Assn

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 COLLEGE SPARK WASHINGTON 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

1get no government money at all

0rely 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: COMMUNITY COLLEGES OF SPOKANE.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

insufficient risk

Limited financial data in public filings.

Track record & reputation

low risk

7 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 911469988 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 COMMUNITY COLLEGES OF SPOKANE, 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

Awaiting reportFinancial stability— Runway not derivable from filings.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
WatchReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 67% 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 College Spark Washington?

Find your warmest path to College Spark Washington 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.

COLLEGE SPARK WASHINGTON

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?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

42 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to College Spark Washington?

More from the funding graph

COLLEGE SPARK WASHINGTON

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?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

42 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to College Spark Washington?

More from the funding graph