· Public charity
Douglas Island Pink & Chum Inc
To sustain and enhance valuable salmon resources of the state of alaska for the economic, social, and cultural benefit of all citizens, and to promote public understanding of alaska's salmon resources and salmon fisheries through research, education, and tourism.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2023.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 1 grants below total $50,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $119,000 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $69,000 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NORTHERN SOUTHERN REGIONAL | $50,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–23) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein 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 — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +71% since the first grant, against +51% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2023, 8 since wound down.
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
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
- NSNORTHERN SOUTHEAST REGIONAL AQUACULTURE ASSOCIATION INC6× · 2017–2023 · $5.1M · revenue +50% · 50% of their budget
- SSSouthern Southeast Regional Aquaculture2× · 2018–2019 · $4.1M · revenue +18%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FOUNDATION2× · 2018–2020 · $65k · revenue +71%
Funded once
- ADALASKA DISCOVERY FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +51%
- TWTHE WHALE PROJECTone grant, 2017 · $10k
- TWTAKSHANUK WATERSHED COUNCILgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $7k · revenue +43%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
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.
SEACC's mission is to protect the special places of the world's largest temperate rainforest, promote conservation, and advocate for sustainability in human use of natural resources. Inspired by the land, wildlife, cultures, and…
Western alaska fisheries support and restoration.
The salish sea schools mission is to awaken curiosity and deepen connections with the sea through shore and sea exploration programs for all ages.
The alaska sealife center generates and shares scientific knowledge to promote understanding and stewardship of alaska's marine ecosystems.
To conserve functioning salmon/steelhead eco-system at watershed levels, integrate angling activities with basic scientific research, collect raw data, monitor environmental functions, salmon/steelhead population dynamics, public…
Since 1971, the northern alaska environmental center has promoted environmental conservation and sustainable resource stewardship in interior and arctic alaska through education and advocacy.
Protecting tribal land and waterways for future generations
Stand for Salmon is an advocacy organization that promotes the protection of Alaskas salmon resources through education and advocacy. The specific objectives and purpose of this organization shall be a. to provide public education about…
Support ecosystem-based wildlife management by increasing public awareness of wildlife issues, responding to information requests, advocating for science-based wildlife habitat management through proposal and comment submissions, and…
The foundation board is comprised of members with diverse backgrounds and expertise who devote their shared commitment and passion to collectively support protection and restoration of the washington coast region salmon by providing…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture and the most unlike its peers is Alaska Discovery Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 9 of the 12 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
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.
- Who funds NORTHERN SOUTHEAST REGIONAL AQUACULTURE ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds Southern Southeast Regional Aquaculture ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC SALMON TREATY COALITION INC ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SITKA SOUND SCIENCE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Juneau Economic Development Council ↗
- Who funds SOUTHEAST ALASKA LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds ALASKA DISCOVERY FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds TAKSHANUK WATERSHED COUNCIL ↗
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.
Open a dossier: Juneau Community Foundation · Rasmuson Foundation · The Alaska Community Foundation
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 organization Douglas Island Pink & Chum Inc 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.
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 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.