· Private foundation
Henry M Jackson Foundation
The henry m.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k15 grants · $59k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $210k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
- $250k+1 grant · $250k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| FREEDOM HOUSE | $250,000 |
| THE COUNCIL ON STRATEGIC RISKS | $50,000 |
| HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST | $40,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WA JACKSON SCHOOL OF INL STUDIES | $30,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WA - EVANS SCHOOL | $30,000 |
| SEATTLE FOUNDATION | $30,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WA JACKSON SCHOOL OF INL STUDIES | $30,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WA JACKSON SCHOOL OF INL STUDIES | $22,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WA | $15,000 |
| UNIVERSITY OF WA - EVANS SCHOOL | $12,500 |
| FREE RUSSIA FOUNDATION | $7,500 |
| ASSOCIATION FOR COLLECTIVE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ON SAFETY AND SECURITY | $5,000 |
| NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE OF COLORADO | $5,000 |
| GLACIER PEAK INSTITUTE | $5,000 |
| HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CONSORTIUM OF SEATTLE-KING COUNTY | $5,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY22–25, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 33% of Henry M Jackson Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 48% of the giving stays in WA; read by stated purpose it is 30% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +22% since the first grant, against +12% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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 FY2025, 66% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $181k 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
- TCTHE COUNCIL ON STRATEGIC RISKS4× · 2022–2025 · $200k · revenue +30%
- HDHOUSING DEVELOPMENT CONSORTIUM OF SEATTLE - KING COUNTY3× · 2022–2025 · $20k · revenue +17%
- GPGlacier Peak Institute4× · 2022–2025 · $19k · revenue +171%
Funded once
- UHUW HENRY M JACKSON SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIESone grant, 2024 · $55k
- UOUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON JACKSON SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIESone grant, 2023 · $52k
- UEUW EVANS SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY AND GOVERNANCEone grant, 2024 · $43k
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.
The Center for Environmental Law & Policy is a statewide organization whose mission is to protect, preserve and restore Washington's waters through education, advocacy, policy reform, and public interest litigation.
The Clean Energy Transition Institute (CETI) is an independent, nonpartisan research and analysis nonprofit whose mission is to accelerate an equitable clean energy transition in the Northwest.
Equip the public and public decision-makers with the policy research and practical tools they need to embed the values of fairness, care, and opportunity into the foundations of Washington's economy.
The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…
We empower Washington youth leaders to create sustainable, positive change through advocacy, youth voter turnout, and leadership development programs.
We are workers, united across different industries to improve our working conditions and our lives. We come together as working people to build power through education, organizing, and enforcement. We work to raise and uphold standards in…
See schedule o.enterprise washington empowers its members to effectively engage in public affairs and the political process. enterprise washington provides its business and association members with leading-edge research and strategies to…
Advocate for tax policy in Washington State
The association of washington cities builds connections between our state's diverse cities and towns, while providing our members with the support needed to thrive through delivery of data-driven education, nationally recognized pooling…
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
Washington Progress Fund is building a permanent and powerful social change movement in Washington state supported by a network of committed donors. WPF envisions a Washington state where government serves the public interest and we all…
To increase the economic well-being and quality of life for all citizens of the region; to coordinate provincial, territorial, and state policies throughout the region; to identify and promote "models of success and to serve as a conduit…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Leadership Tomorrow and the most unlike its peers is Operation Snow Leopard. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 32 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
36 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. 36 of the 57 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 FREEDOM HOUSE ↗
- Who funds THE COUNCIL ON STRATEGIC RISKS ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS FIRST ↗
- Who funds SEATTLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CLIMATE SOLUTIONS ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL AND ENERGY STUDY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds MILLENNIAL ACTION PROJECT DBA FUTURE CAUCUS ↗
- Who funds HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CONSORTIUM OF SEATTLE - KING COUNTY ↗
- Who funds Glacier Peak Institute ↗
- Who funds North Cascades Institute ↗
- Who funds Asso for Collective Community Engagement on Safety ↗
- Who funds OPERATION SNOW LEOPARD ↗
- Who funds HOPEWORKS SOCIAL ENTERPRISES ↗
- Who funds LEADERSHIP TOMORROW ↗
- Who funds SEATTLE 2030 DISTRICT ↗
- Who funds FREE RUSSIA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ONE WORLD NOW ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL CIVIC LEAGUE ↗
- Who funds PROJECT GIRL MENTORING PROGRAM ↗
- Who funds LEADERSHIP LAUNCH ↗
- Who funds JEFFERSON LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds THE YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF GREATER SEATTLE (6871) ↗
- Who funds Braver AngelsInc ↗
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: Seattle Foundation · Henry M Jackson Endowment · Gates Foundation · Credit Unions in the State of Washington · School's Out Washington · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · The Satterberg Foundation Inc · The Norcliffe Foundation · The Hugh and Jane Ferguson Foundation · Community Foundation of Snohomish County · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Grousemont 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 Henry M Jackson Foundation 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.