Skip to content

· Private foundation

David J & Mary L G Theroux 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.

$516k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$503k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Social Science$2.8MCommunity Improvement$205kHuman Services$172kYouth Development$68kArts & Culture$40kHealth$40kEducation$20kEnvironment$10kOther$0
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $13k
  • $250k+1 grant · $503k
$503,296
Median grant
1
States reached
$8.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE$503,296
SALVATION ARMY$12,500
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%BIZWORLDORG: $35k → 10%BIZWORLD: $50k → 10%TALENT MARKET (AMERICA'S FUTURE): $5k → 14%TALLGRASS FILM ASSOCIATION: $3k → 16%STUDENTS FOR LIFE OF AMERICA: $500 → 8%TALENT MARKET: $3k → 9%ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRESS: $10k → 10%BIZWORLD: $50k → 10%BALLET WICHITA: $600 → 16%BIZWORLDORG: $25k → 10%BIZWORLD: $50k → 10%RIORDAN CLINIC: $10k → 16%INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE: $800k → 10%BIZWORLD: $50k → 10%RIORDAN CLINIC: $8k → 16%INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE: $503k → 10%THE SALVATION ARMY: $41k → 10%RIORDAN CLINIC: $7k → 16%THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE: $329k → 10%SALVATION ARMY: $36k → 10%RIORDAN CLINIC: $5k → 16%INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE: $300k → 10%SALVATION ARMY: $25k → 10%RIORDAN CLINIC: $5k → 16%THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE: $300k → 10%SALVATION ARMY: $20k → 10%RIORDAN CLINIC: $5k → 16%THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE: $296k → 10%SALVATION ARMY: $17k → 10%THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE: $296k → 10%THE SALVATION ARMY: $13k → 10%CS LEWIS SOCIETY OF CA: $25k → 10%SALVATION ARMY: $13k → 10%CS LEWIS SOCIETY OF CALIFORNIA: $20k → 10%THE SALVATION ARMY: $8k → 10%CS LEWIS SOCIETY OF CA: $10k → 10%CS LEWIS SOCIETY OF CA: $2k → 10%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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$3.3M · 6 repeat orgs$96k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +69% since the first grant, against +63% for those funded once.

6 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
9

Total granted

$3.3M
$96k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+69%
+63%

Still filing today

50%
56%

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
Arts & CultureEducationEnvironmentYouth DevelopmentCivil RightsOther
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

  • TI
    THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE
    7× · 2017–2024 · $2.8M · revenue +185%
  • BF
    Bizworld Foundation
    2× · 2022–2023 · $60k · revenue +62%
  • RC
    RIORDAN CLINIC INC
    6× · 2017–2023 · $40k · revenue +69%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $50k
  • CS
    C S LEWIS SOCIETY OF CALIFORNIA
    one grant, 2022 · $20k
  • CW
    CIVILIZATION WORKSgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue +88%
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
Institute for the Future

Institute for the future is the world's leading futures organization. our mission is to prepare the world to create better, more equitable futures by disrupting short-term thinking with visions of transformative possibilities.

Education
2
The American Antitrust Institute Inc

Promote competition that protects consumers, businesses, and society.

Social Science
3
Liberty Justice Center

To advance economic and social liberties and a free enterprise society through strategic litigation, training, communication, activism and research. in addition, the center will train law students, lawyers and policy activists in the…

Crime & Legal
4
Siff

Siff is a seattle-based 501(c)(3) arts nonprofit dedicated to the creation of vibrant experiences and spaces that champion film discovery and arts education.

Youth Development
5
Fielding Graduate University

We provide exemplary interdisciplinary programs for a community of scholar-practitioners within a distributed learning model grounded in student-driven inquiry and leading to enhanced knowledge.

—
6
Academy of International Business

We create, nurture, and empower a global community of scholars focused on creating, advancing, and disseminating knowledge in international business research, education, policy, and practice.

Education
7
Conservation X Labs Inc

To improve the efficacy, speed, cost, sustainability, and scaling of conservation solutions through harnessing exponential technology, innovation, and entrepreneurship to prevent human-induced extinction.

Animals
8
Orcid Inc

Orcid provides an identifier for individuals to use with their name as they engage in research, scholarship, and innovation activities. we provide open tools that enable transparent and trustworthy connections between researchers, their…

Education
9
Toxic-Free Future F/K/a Washington Toxics Coalition

As a national leader in environmental health research and advocacy, toxic- free future uses the power of science, education, and activism, to drive strong laws and corporate responsibility that protect the health of all people and the…

Environment
10
Life Science Washington

Life science washington is a non-profit trade and professional association dedicated to promoting innovation and responsible growth in the life sciences and biomedical industries in the state of washington. promotion and education are…

—
11
The Civic Federation

The civic federation provides objective research and recommendations to improve government efficiency, transparency and accountability and to educate policymakers and the public.

—
12
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Independent Institute; the most unlike its peers is Riordan Clinic Inc. 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

8 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. 8 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
7/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE: $2,824,462 · OtherTHE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTEBIZWORLD: $200,000 · OtherBIZWORLDTHE SALVATION ARMY: $172,119 · Other+6 more: $154,000 · OtherBizworld Foundation: $60,000 · EducationCIVILIZATION WORKS: $10,000 · EnvironmentAmerica's Future Foundation: $5,000 · Youth DevelopmentTALLGRASS FILM ASSOCIATION: $2,500 · Arts & CultureBALLET WICHITA INC: $600 · Arts & CultureStudents for Life of America Inc: $500 · Civil Rights
Other$3,350,581Education$60,000Environment$10,000Youth Development$5,000Arts & Culture$3,100Civil Rights$500

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 INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE: $2,824,462 over 7y, 20% of budgetBizworld Foundation: $60,000 over 2y, 5.6% of budgetRIORDAN CLINIC INC: $39,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCIVILIZATION WORKS: $10,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetAmerica's Future Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetTALLGRASS FILM ASSOCIATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetBALLET WICHITA INC: $600 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetStudents for Life of America Inc: $500 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.

  • Who funds THE INDEPENDENT INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds Bizworld Foundation ↗
  • Who funds RIORDAN CLINIC INC ↗
  • Who funds CIVILIZATION WORKS ↗
  • Who funds America's Future Foundation ↗
  • Who funds TALLGRASS FILM ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds BALLET WICHITA INC ↗
  • Who funds Students for Life of America Inc ↗

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.

Garvey Kansas FoundationKS13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Garvey Kansas Foundation · 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 David J & Mary L G Theroux Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from David J & Mary L G Theroux Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get 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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on David J & Mary L G Theroux’s filings →

    More from the funding graph