Skip to content
Cw Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Cw Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$79k
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Education$195kReligion$88kHuman Services$42kYouth Development$29kPublic Benefit$23kCommunity Improvement$16kHealth$13kPhilanthropy$5kOther$0
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $9k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$10,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$1.6M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY$50,000
AZ FREE ENTERPRISE CLUB$10,000
IMPACT CHURCH$10,000
RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES$9,000
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, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%HALO FOR FREEDOM WARRIOR FOUNDATION: $3k → 8%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.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
NV
PA
CA
UT
AZ
DC
TX
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.

78%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$326k · 9 repeat orgs$91k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2024, 5 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
15

Total granted

$326k
$91k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+55%

Still filing today

33%
53%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentEducationInternationalOther
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

  • RM
    Ronald McDonald House Charities of the Intermountain Area Inc
    2× · 2018–2024 · $11k · revenue +28%
  • VH
    VALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION
    2× · 2017–2018 · $7k · revenue +370%
  • LL
    LIVE LIKE SAM FOUNDATION
    3× · 2020–2022 · $5k · revenue +50%

Funded once

  • SA
    STARS AND STRIPES CHILDREN'S FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $28k · revenue +55%
  • DU
    DREXEL UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2017 · $25k · revenue +10%
  • BB
    BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF ORANGE COUNTY AND THE INLAND EMPIRE INC
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +14%
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
Phoenix Children's Hospital Foundation

Phoenix children's hospital foundation supports phoenix children's hospital through fundraising ensuring that the hospital continues to stay on the leading edge of pediatric medicine and is equipped to fulfill its mission to advance hope,…

Health
2
Phoenix Children's Hospital

To advance hope, healing and the best healthcare for children and their families.

Health
3
Children's Health Care

We champion the health needs of children and families. we are committed to improving children's health by providing the highest-quality, family centered care, advanced through research and education.

Health
4
Orlando Health Inc

Orlando health is a trusted leader inspiring hope through the advancement of health. our mission as a community-owned organization is to improve the health and quality of life of the individuals and communities we serve.

Health
5
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Leadership in the prevention, treatment, and cure of cancer through excellence, vision and cost effectiveness in patient care, outreach programs, research, and education.

Health
6
Children's Hospital Colorado

To improve the health of children through the provision of high-quality, coordinated programs of patient care, education, research and advocacy.

Health
7
Utah Partners for Health

Utah partners for health provides compassionate, comprehensive, quality care to empower underserved individuals, families, and communities in a patient-centered medical home.

Health
8
Vail Clinic Inc % Vhh Accounting Department

Elevating health across our mountain communities.

Health
9
Banner Health

Banner health's nonprofit mission is "making health care easier, so life can be better".

Health
10
Mount St Vincent Home Inc

As part of intermountain health, mount saint vincent partners with children and families to heal beyond trauma into a healthy and hopeful future.

—
11
Southern California University of Health Sciences

The mission of southern california university of health sciences (scu) is to educate students as competent, caring and successful practitioners of integrative healthcare. the university is committed to providing excellence in academics,…

Education
12
Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh Foundation

Children's hospital of pittsburgh foundation is the sole fundraising arm of upmc children's hospital of pittsburgh.the foundation exists to provide financial support for the hospital's mission of improving the health and well-being of…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Valleywise Health Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Drexel University. 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

12 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. 12 of the 25 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
11/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY: $169,500 · OtherARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITYIMPACT CHURCH: $86,919 · OtherIMPACT CHURCHSTARS AND STRIPES FOUNDATION: $23,200 · OtherSTARS AND STRIPES FOUNDATIONAZ FREE ENTERPRISE CLUB: $15,500 · Other+10 more: $34,550 · Other+10 moreSTARS AND STRIPES CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $27,785 · Human ServicesHALO FOR FREEDOM WARRIOR FOUNDATION: $2,500 · Human ServicesDREXEL UNIVERSITY: $25,000 · EducationRonald McDonald House Charities of the Intermountain Area Inc: $11,250 · HealthVALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $7,000 · HealthPeople's Health Clicnic: $5,000 · Health+1 more: $250 · HealthLIVE LIKE SAM FOUNDATION: $4,630 · Youth DevelopmentTAG RANCH INC: $4,450 · Youth DevelopmentPARK CITY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $5,000 · PhilanthropyTHE HOPE ALLIANCE: $250 · International
Other$329,669Human Services$30,285Education$25,000Health$23,500Youth Development$9,080Philanthropy$5,000International$250

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 budgetSTARS AND STRIPES CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $27,785 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetDREXEL UNIVERSITY: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRonald McDonald House Charities of the Intermountain Area Inc: $11,250 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF ORANGE COUNTY AND THE INLAND EMPIRE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetVALLEYWISE HEALTH FOUNDATION: $7,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetPARK CITY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPeople's Health Clicnic: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetLIVE LIKE SAM FOUNDATION: $4,630 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetTAG RANCH INC: $4,450 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetHALO FOR FREEDOM WARRIOR FOUNDATION: $2,500 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTHE HOPE ALLIANCE: $250 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.

Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Donor Advised Charitable Giving IncCO5.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 Cw Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Cw 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%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 25 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Cw’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