Skip to content
Columbus Charities at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Columbus Charities

Receive and provide contributions for charitable and educational activities

$291k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$176k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

Youth Development$420kRecreation & Sports$159kHealth$59kReligion$36kHuman Services$27kEducation$23k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 10 grants below total $263,039, the rows itemized in this filing. The $290,659 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $27,620 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k4 grants · $27k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $61k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $176k
$11,365
Median grant
4
States reached
$438k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Children's Charities Foundation's Coats for Kids$175,578
Special Olympics Washington$13,612
Diocese of Spokane$12,415
Diocese of Yakima$12,415
Archdiocese of Seattle$11,365
L'Arche of Spokane$10,808
JOYA - Guild School$9,764
The ARC of Spokane$6,269
Anna Schindler Foundation$5,541
Pegasus Project Foundation$5,272
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 (FY22–25, $65k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Pegasus Project Foundation: $5k → 17%American Wheelchair Mission: $17k → 13%American Wheelchair Mission: $17k → 13%L'Arche of Spokane: $11k → 12%L'Arche of Spokane: $11k → 12%L'Arche of Spokane: $5k → 12%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.

91%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$662k · 5 repeat orgs$62k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +21% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
1

Total granted

$662k
$9k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
0%

Still filing today

80%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $53k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesYouth DevelopmentEducationHealthOther
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

  • TP
    THE PETER B TEELEY CHILDRENS CHARITIES FOUNDATION INC
    3× · 2023–2025 · $420k · revenue +24% · 61% of their budget
  • SO
    SPECIAL OLYMPICS WASHINGTON
    4× · 2020–2025 · $159k · revenue +12%
  • AW
    AMERICAN WHEELCHAIR FOUNDATION
    2× · 2022–2024 · $33k · revenue +54%

Funded once

  • ES
    Easter Seals Washington
    one grant, 2024 · $9k · revenue 0%
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
Spokane Guilds' School & Neuromuscular Center

Joya is dedicated to igniting hope, empowering children and families, and establishing lifelong skills. We provide exceptional pediatric therapy and support services, engage families, and remove financial barriers. Our community is built…

—
2
The Arc of Southwest Washington

The arc of southwest washington helps people with intellectual and developmental disabilities achieve a lifetime of success by building capability with respectful advocacy; direct support of individuals and their families; and promotion of…

—
3
Arc of Washington Co Inc

To create partnerships that foster nurturing communities where people with disabilities can live their vision of valued life.

Human Services
4
Larche Noah Sealth of Seattle

To make known the gifts of people with developmental disabilities revealed through mutually transforming relationships. To engage in our diverse cultures, working together toward a more humane society. To foster community that is inspired…

Human Services
5
LArche Portland

At l'arche portland people with and without developmental disabilities create home and build community together. we nurture long-term mutual relationships that reveal the gifts of people with developmental disabilities. in doing so we…

Human Services
6
The Arc of the Capital Area

We empower central texans with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their families through compassionate case management and innovative programs.

—
7
Skagit Preschool and Resource Center

Programs for children with special needs from birth to six. sparc offers opportunities for family education, participation and support so that familiies may become more knowledgeable about their childs needs and goals are are better able…

Education
8
Arc of West Central Colorado

The Arc of West Central Colorado is organized exclusively for charitable, religious, educational and scientific purposes, including, for such purposes, the making of distributions to organizations that qualify as exempt organizations…

Human Services
9
Northwest Autism Center

Formed in 2002, Northwest Autism Center exists to build, facilitate, and coordinate comprehensive services for those with autism spectrum disorder and other developmental disabilities through the lifespan, using community-based approaches.

Health
10
The Arc Oregon

The arc of oregon, together with its network of members and affiliated chapters, advocates for the rights and full community participation of all children and adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

—
11
Wings of Hope Therapeutic Riding Program Inc
—
12
Day Out for the Blind of Spokane
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Easter Seals Washington; the most unlike its peers is Joya Charitable 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

10 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. 10 of the 12 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
4/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE PETER B TEELEY CHILDRENS CHARITIES FOUNDATION INC: $419,707 · Youth DevelopmentTHE PETER B TEELEY CHILDRENS CHARITIES FOUNDATION INCSPECIAL OLYMPICS WASHINGTON: $159,023 · OtherSPECIAL OLYMPICS WASHINGTONJOYA CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $23,496 · OtherJOYA CHARITABLE FOUNDATIONCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE OF YAKIMA: $12,415 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE O…DIOCESE OF SPOKANE: $12,415 · OtherDIOCESE OF SPOKANEARCHDIOCESE OF SEATTLE OFFICE FOR CATHOLIC SCHOOLS: $11,365 · Other+1 more: $6,269 · OtherAMERICAN WHEELCHAIR FOUNDATION: $33,000 · Human ServicesAMERICAN W…LARCHE SPOKANE: $26,811 · Human ServicesLARCHE SPO…PEGASUS PROJECT FOUNDATION: $5,272 · Human ServicesPEGASUS PR…Easter Seals Washington: $9,101 · HealthTHE ANNA SCHINDLER FOUNDATION INC: $5,541 · Education
Youth Development$419,707Other$224,983Human Services$65,083Health$9,101Education$5,541

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 budgetTHE PETER B TEELEY CHILDRENS CHARITIES FOUNDATION INC: $419,707 over 3y, 61% of budgetSPECIAL OLYMPICS WASHINGTON: $159,023 over 4y, 1.5% of budgetAMERICAN WHEELCHAIR FOUNDATION: $33,000 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetLARCHE SPOKANE: $26,811 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE OF YAKIMA: $12,415 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEaster Seals Washington: $9,101 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetThe Arc of Spokane: $6,269 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE ANNA SCHINDLER FOUNDATION INC: $5,541 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetPEGASUS PROJECT FOUNDATION: $5,272 over 1y, 0.9% 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.

Innovia FoundationNational Philanthropi…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Innovia FoundationWA12.9× affinity4 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Innovia Foundation · National Philanthropic Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Columbus Charities funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Columbus Charities. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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 Columbus Charities?

    Find your warmest path to Columbus Charities 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 12 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 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 Columbus Charities’ 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