Skip to content
Growing Tree Foundation Inc at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Private foundation

Growing Tree Foundation Inc

Its FY2022 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$345k
Granted FY2021
18
Grants FY2021
10
States reached
$50k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2021.

Environment$427kArts & Culture$153kCivil Rights$110kPhilanthropy$85kEducation$58kAnimals$45kHealth$35kScience & Tech$23kOther$0
02FY2021 · 18 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2021

  • Under $10k4 grants · $20k
  • $10k–50k13 grants · $275k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$20,000
Median grant
10
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NATURE CONSERVANCY$50,000
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER$30,000
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION$30,000
EQUITY IN EDUCATION COALITION SEATTLE$25,000
SKAGIT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$25,000
FILAMENT THEATRE OF CHICAGO$25,000
UNITED WAY OF SKAGIT COUNTY$25,000
COPE ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER$20,000
CINCINNATI NATURE CENTER$20,000
PADILLA BAY FOUNDATION$20,000
INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS$15,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA$15,000
ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND$15,000
UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS$10,000
SKAGITONIANS TO PRESERVE FARMLAND$5,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–21) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 64% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS: $10k → 8%EARTH WATCH INSTITUTE: $5k → 16%EARTH ISLAND INSTITUTE: $5k → 10%THE NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY: $10k → 17%WORLD WILDLIFE FUND: $8k → 14%INTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $15k → 10%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $30k → 18%Cope Environmental Center: $25k → 18%CINCINNATI NATURE CENTER: $20k → 9%EQUITY IN EDUCATION COALITION SEATTLE: $25k → 9%SKAGIT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $25k → 11%SAINT PAULS EPISCOPAL CHURCH: $8k → 13%FILAMENT THEATRE OF CHICAGO: $25k → 14%NATURE CONSERVANCY: $50k → 7%CENTER FOR CONSERVATION: $15k → 7%UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS: $8k → 8%Earth Watch Institute: $5k → 16%AUDUBON SOCIETY: $5k → 17%SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER: $25k → 18%COPE ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER: $20k → 18%CINCINNATI NATURE CENTER: $20k → 9%EQUITY IN EDUCATION COALITION SEATTLE: $20k → 9%PADILLA BAY FOUNDATION: $20k → 11%FILAMENT THEATER OF CHICAGO: $25k → 14%Center for Conservation: $10k → 7%COPE ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER: $20k → 18%CINCINNATI NATURE CENTER: $20k → 9%SKAGIT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $15k → 11%FILAMENT THEATRE OF CHICAGO: $25k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA: $15k → 17%Cope Environmental Center: $15k → 18%CENTER FOR CONSERVATION CO CINCINNATI NATURE CENTER: $15k → 9%FILAMENT THEATER OF CHICAGO: $10k → 14%PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA: $10k → 17%COPE ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER: $15k → 18%Cincinnati Nature Center: $10k → 9%PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA: $10k → 17%CINCINNATI NATURE CENTER: $10k → 9%ARTIST TRUST: $25k → 9%AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION: $30k → 17%LANGSTON: $25k → 9%AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION: $25k → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $15k → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $10k → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $10k → 17%AUDUBON SOCIETY: $10k → 9%UNITED WAY OF SKAGIT COUNTY: $25k → 11%UNITED WAY OF SKAGIT COUNTY: $15k → 11%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

ME
WA
IL
MI
NY
MA
IN
OH
CA
VA
DC
AL
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.

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$723k · 18 repeat orgs$125k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +32% since the first grant, against +1% for those funded once.

18 repeat relationships: 13 still active in FY2021, 5 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2021 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

18
10

Total granted

$723k
$100k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+32%
+1%

Still filing today

72%
40%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21
EnvironmentArts & CultureEducationAnimalsScience & TechCrime & LegalOther
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

  • CE
    COPE ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER
    5× · 2017–2021 · $100k · revenue +32%
  • CN
    CINCINNATI NATURE CENTER
    4× · 2017–2021 · $80k · revenue +39%
  • SP
    SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC
    2× · 2020–2021 · $55k · revenue +13%

Funded once

  • AT
    Artist Trust
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -1%
  • L
    LANGSTON
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue -66%
  • CF
    CENTER FOR CONSERVATION CO CINCINNATI NATURE CENTER
    one grant, 2019 · $15k
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
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
2
The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education
3
Oikonos - Ecosystem Knowledge

Oikonos studies and protects imperiled ecosystems by engaging diverse communities through innovative scientific and artistic collaborations.

Science & Tech
4
Southeast Alaska Conservation Council Inc-Seacc

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…

Environment
5
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
6
California Coastkeeper dba California Coastkeeper Alliance

California Coastkeeper Alliance unites Waterkeeper programs statewide to fight for swimmable, fishable, and drinkable waters for all Californians.

Environment
7
Cascade Climate Inc

To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.

Environment
8
Northwest Environmental Defense Center

Nedc's mission is to work toward a future in which the pacific northwest leads the nation in developing, implementing & enforcing strong laws and regulations that protect the environment & human health, and where our governments &…

—
9
Aquarium of the Pacific Corporation

The aquarium of the pacific's mission is to instill a sense of wonder, respect, and stewardship for the pacific ocean, its inhabitants, and ecosystems.

Animals
10
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

Education
11
Fsc I&P

Fsc i&p promotes environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world's forests. this mission aligns with the forest stewardship council (fsc), its network of offices, and other organizations.…

Philanthropy
12
Earthcorps

To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.

International
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Environmental Defense Fund Incorporated; the most unlike its peers is Langston. 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

21 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. 21 of the 33 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/21
Grantees still filing
15/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COPE ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER: $100,000 · OtherCOPE ENVIRONMENTAL CENTERTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $58,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCYAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION: $55,000 · OtherAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNIONPADILLA BAY FOUNDATION: $51,000 · OtherPADILLA BAY FOUNDATIONFILAMENT THEATRE OF CHICAGO: $50,000 · OtherFILAMENT THEATRE OF CHICAGOEQUITY IN EDUCATION COALITION SEATTLE: $45,000 · OtherEQUITY IN EDUCATION COALITION SEATTLEFILAMENT THEATER OF CHICAGO: $35,000 · OtherFILAMENT THEATER OF CHICAGOCENTER FOR CONSERVATION: $25,000 · OtherORCA CONSERVANCY: $20,000 · Other+11 more: $93,550 · Other+11 moreCINCINNATI NATURE CENTER: $80,000 · EnvironmentCINCINNATI NATURE…ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $45,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEF…WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $18,000 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FU…Earth Island Institute Inc: $5,000 · EnvironmentUnited Way of Skagit County: $45,000 · PhilanthropyUnited Way…THE SKAGIT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $40,000 · PhilanthropyTHE SKAGIT…Artist Trust: $25,000 · Arts & CultureLANGSTON: $25,000 · Arts & CultureINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $15,000 · Arts & CultureAerial Dance Chicago: $2,500 · Arts & CultureSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $55,000 · Crime & LegalPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $35,000 · HealthTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $22,500 · International
Other$532,550Environment$148,000Philanthropy$85,000Arts & Culture$67,500Crime & Legal$55,000Health$35,000International$22,500

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 budgetCOPE ENVIRONMENTAL CENTER: $100,000 over 5y, 8.1% of budgetCINCINNATI NATURE CENTER: $80,000 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $58,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC: $55,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetPADILLA BAY FOUNDATION: $51,000 over 5y, 13% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $45,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetUnited Way of Skagit County: $45,000 over 3y, 3.2% of budgetTHE SKAGIT COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $35,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetArtist Trust: $25,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetLANGSTON: $25,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $22,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetORCA CONSERVANCY: $20,000 over 4y, 4.2% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $18,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetINTERLOCHEN CENTER FOR THE ARTS: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetEARTHWATCH INSTITUTE INC: $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSKAGITONIANS TO PRESERVE FARMLAND: $15,000 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetSchool of Acrobatics & New Circus Arts: $11,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAerial Dance Chicago: $2,500 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetDONORSCHOOSEORG: $2,000 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.

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.

Growing Tree Foundati…Seattle FoundationBaird Foundation IncVanguard Charitable E…Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…Network for GoodFidelity Investments …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Growing Tree FoundationWA22.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Growing Tree Foundation · Seattle Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Growing Tree Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Growing Tree Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%4%8%15%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
    2get no government money at all
    7report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Growing Tree Foundation Inc?

    Find your warmest path to Growing Tree Foundation Inc 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 33 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 2021, released 2021. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2022) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2021, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Growing Tree’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