Skip to content

· Private foundation

Gertrude and Eldon Sallee Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$122k
Granted FY2025still arriving
9
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$20k
Largest
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.

Health$317kHuman Services$140kReligion$133kEducation$103kYouth Development$60kRecreation & Sports$45k
02FY2025 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$15,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PROVAIL$20,000
BANCHERO DISABILITY PARTNERS$15,000
KINDERING$15,000
SEATTLE CHILDRENS PLAYGARDEN$15,000
ALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES$15,000
LITTLE BIT THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER$12,000
ATWORK$10,000
THE SALVATION ARMY$10,000
NORTHWEST CENTER$10,000
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 (FY20–25, $185k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%ATWORK: $15k → 9%ATWORK: $15k → 9%ATWORK: $15k → 9%ATWORK: $10k → 9%ATWORK: $10k → 9%ATWORK: $10k → 9%ALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES: $20k → 9%ALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES: $20k → 9%ALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES: $20k → 9%ALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES: $20k → 9%ALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES: $15k → 9%ALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES: $15k → 9%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.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$767k · 9 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
2

Total granted

$767k
$30k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
+36%

Still filing today

78%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesRecreation & SportsEmploymentYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • AS
    ALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES
    6× · 2020–2025 · $110k · revenue +44%
  • KC
    KINDERING CENTER
    6× · 2020–2025 · $103k · revenue +29%
  • BD
    BANCHERO DISABILITY PARTNERS
    4× · 2020–2025 · $85k · revenue +42%

Funded once

  • PG
    PLAY GARDEN
    one grant, 2020 · $15k
  • SP
    SEATTLE PARKS FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue +36%
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
Disability Rights Washington

Disability rights washington's mission is to advance the dignity, equality, and self determination of people with disabilities. we work to pursue justice on matters related to human and legal rights.

Human Services
2
Abilities At Work

To provide employment and alternative service programs for developmentally disabled adults in the portland metro area.

Employment
3
Special Olympics Washington

Mission: to provide inclusive sports, health, and leadership programs that enable individuals with idd to develop skills, improve health, and participate fully in their communities.vision: to be the leading organization in washington state…

—
4
Larche Spokane

To make known the gifts of people with development disabilities, revealed through mutually transforming relationships, to foster an environment in community that responds to the changing needs of members while being faithful to the core…

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
Washington Vocational Services

To provide job development, job seeking skills and job placement for persons with disabilities. we are dedicated to providing outstanding quality services that result in successful community involvement and employment for persons with…

Employment
7
Easter Seals Washington

Easterseals Washington is changing the way the world defines and views disabilities by making profound, positive differences in peoples lives every day. We enrich education, enhance health, expand employment, and elevate our community.

Health
8
Northwest Center Services

Mission of northwest center services is to promote the growth, development, and independence of persons with disabilities through programs of therapy, education, and work opportunity.

Human Services
9
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
10
Special Mobility Services Inc

Provide short distance transportation for elderly and disabled individuals.

Human Services
11
Marrakech Inc

Provides person-centered and inclusive services to children and adults with and without disabilities that includes securing employment, connecting to necessary supportive services, accessing housing and participating fully as contributing…

Employment
12
Brightspark Early Learning Services

To nurture and sustain child-centered, antiracist early learning communities.Our work is to:1) Help families access high quality childcare and after-school care.2) Increase the availability of high-quality care through coaching and…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwest Center; the most unlike its peers is Seattle Childrens Playgarden. 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 11 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
8/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PROVAIL: $132,500 · OtherPROVAILKINDERING CENTER: $102,500 · OtherKINDERING CENTERBANCHERO DISABILITY PARTNERS: $85,000 · OtherBANCHERO DISABILITY PARTNERSTHE SALVATION ARMY: $65,000 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMYPLAY GARDEN: $15,000 · OtherALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES: $110,000 · Human ServicesALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SER…ATWORK: $75,000 · Human ServicesATWORKSEATTLE CHILDRENS PLAYGARDEN: $75,000 · Youth DevelopmentSEATTLE CH…NORTHWEST CENTER: $70,000 · EmploymentNORTHWEST…LITTLE BIT THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER: $52,000 · Recreation & SportsLITTLE BI…SEATTLE PARKS FOUNDATION: $15,000 · Recreation & SportsSEATTLE P…
Other$400,000Human Services$185,000Youth Development$75,000Employment$70,000Recreation & Sports$67,000

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 budgetALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES: $110,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetKINDERING CENTER: $102,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetBANCHERO DISABILITY PARTNERS: $85,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetATWORK: $75,000 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetSEATTLE CHILDRENS PLAYGARDEN: $75,000 over 5y, 2.5% of budgetNORTHWEST CENTER: $70,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetLITTLE BIT THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER: $52,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetSEATTLE PARKS FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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 ALPHA SUPPORTED LIVING SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds KINDERING CENTER ↗
  • Who funds BANCHERO DISABILITY PARTNERS ↗
  • Who funds ATWORK ↗
  • Who funds SEATTLE CHILDRENS PLAYGARDEN ↗
  • Who funds NORTHWEST CENTER ↗
  • Who funds LITTLE BIT THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER ↗
  • Who funds SEATTLE PARKS FOUNDATION ↗

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.

Glaser Foundation IncWI13.6× affinity4 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Glaser Foundation Inc · Elizabeth a Lynn Foundation · Employees Community Fund of Boeing-Puget Sound · Liberty Mutual Foundation Inc · Employees Community Fund of the Boeing Company · United Way of King County · 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 Gertrude and Eldon Sallee Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Gertrude and Eldon Sallee 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%6%13%19%25%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 · 0–25%
    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 11 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Gertrude and Eldon Sallee’s filings →

    More from the funding graph