Skip to content

· Private foundation

Karen and Gary Schwartz 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.

$3.0M
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$2.5M
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$11MHuman Services$5.9MReligion$2.3MAnimals$135kPhilanthropy$100kYouth Development$65kFood & Nutrition$50kHousing & Shelter$25kOther$0
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k5 grants · $25k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $35k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $480k
  • $250k+1 grant · $2.5M
$25,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$3.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
KLINE GALLAND FOUNDATION$2,500,000
TEMPLE DE HIRSCH SINAI$180,000
HILLEL AT THE UW$100,000
FOUNDATION FOR ANGELMAN SYNDROME THERAPEUTICS$100,000
STROUM JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER$100,000
SALVATION ARMY$25,000
TREEHOUSE$10,000
ARIZONA HUMANE SOCIETY$5,000
YAKIMA VALLEY PET RESCUE$5,000
HALO ANIMAL RESCUE$5,000
SEATTLE HUMANE SOCIETY$5,000
RODS HOUSE$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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–24, $5.7M) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $3.0M → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $1.4M → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $430k → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $400k → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $200k → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $100k → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $100k → 9%JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $80k → 9%WELLSPRING FAMILY SERVICE: $5k → 9%WELLSPRING FAMILY SERVICE: $5k → 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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$19M · 17 repeat orgs$426k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +33% since the first grant, against +11% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
8

Total granted

$19M
$221k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+33%
+11%

Still filing today

59%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $205k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsHuman ServicesHealthHousing & ShelterYouth DevelopmentEducationOther
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

  • JF
    JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE
    8× · 2017–2024 · $5.7M · revenue +107%
  • T
    TREEHOUSE
    6× · 2017–2025 · $95k · revenue +172%
  • HH
    HALO HELPING ANIMALS LIVE ON INC
    6× · 2019–2025 · $40k · revenue +4%

Funded once

  • SA
    SPOKANE AREA JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE
    one grant, 2024 · $100k
  • TF
    THE FOSTER ALLIANCE
    one grant, 2020 · $50k · revenue +11%
  • FL
    FOOD LIFELINE
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +6%
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
Feral Cat SpayNeuter Project

Our mission is to save the lives of homeless cats by providing access to high volume spay/neuter surgery in a safe and humane environment, collaborating with others and mentoring like-minded organizations to increase spay/neuter in their…

Animals
2
Humane Society of Yuma

To reduce the number of homeless pets through adoption, rescue and spay and neuter programs.

Animals
3
Friends for Animals of Metro Detroit

The friends are dedicated to the rescue, protection, and adoption of companion animals in need while inspiring the human-animal bond. we meet our mission by:-saving 100% of healthy and treatable animals.-providing high-quality animal care…

Animals
4
Seattle Area Feline Rescue Fka Animal Talk Rescue

Safe rescue saves feline lives by taking in homeless cats, giving them the care they need, finding them loving homes, and supporting their human companions. we do this because we believe each cat has inherent value and that humans and…

Animals
5
Washington Humane Society

The washington humane society protects animals, supports families, and advocates for positive change to create a world where all animals can thrive. we enrich the humanity of our communities by promoting compassion and encouraging people…

Animals
6
Southwest Youth and Family Services

SWYFS partners with youth and families to transform their futures.

Human Services
7
School's Out Washington

School's out washington (sowa) drives positive systemic change so that all washington's children and youth, particularly those furthest from justice, have access to a robust ecosystem of high-quality expanded learning programs.

Youth Development
8
Friends of Seattle Waterfront

To bring people, communities, and resources together to ensure waterfront park thrives as a vibrant gathering space - uplifting locals, fostering connections and honoring seattle's natural beauty and stories.

Community Improvement
9
Spokane Humane Society

The vision of Spokane Humane Society is to enrich the lives of animals and their companions through Support, Education, Advocacy and Love (SEAL). As the oldest local non-profit in Spokane, we have been serving companion animals in need and…

Animals
10
Jobs with Justice San Francisco

A long-term, strategic alliance of labor, community, faith-based, and student organizations working together to build greater economic power for workers and community members through employee rights at work and access to good jobs,…

Employment
11
Kitsap Humane Society

Providing positive life changing solutions to people and animals in need.

Animals
12
Michigan Humane Society

To improve and save lives through compassionate care, community engagement and advocacy for animals.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Arizona Humane Society; the most unlike its peers is Yakima Valley Pet Rescue and Adoption Center. 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

17 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. 17 of the 29 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
11/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

KLINE GALLAND FOUNDATION: $10,458,940 · OtherKLINE GALLAND FOUNDATIONTEMPLE DE HIRSCH SINAI: $1,313,000 · OtherTEMPLE DE HIRSCH SINAIHILLEL AT THE UW: $650,000 · Other+14 more: $542,600 · OtherJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $5,660,000 · Human ServicesJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE+1 more: $10,000 · Human ServicesFOUNDATION FOR ANGELMAN SYNDROME THERAPEUTICS: $100,000 · HealthFRIENDS OF YOUTH: $65,000 · HealthJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER SEATTLE: $100,000 · PhilanthropyTHE HADASSAH FOUNDATION INC: $18,000 · PhilanthropyHALO HELPING ANIMALS LIVE ON INC: $40,000 · AnimalsYakima Valley Pet Rescue and Adoption Center: $35,000 · AnimalsTHE HUMANE SOCIETY FOR SEATTLEKING COUNTY: $15,000 · AnimalsArizona Humane Society: $15,000 · AnimalsTREEHOUSE: $95,000 · Youth DevelopmentTHE FOSTER ALLIANCE: $50,000 · Education
Other$12,964,540Human Services$5,670,000Health$165,000Philanthropy$118,000Animals$105,000Youth Development$95,000Education$50,000

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 budgetJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE: $5,660,000 over 8y, 13% of budgetJEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER SEATTLE: $100,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTREEHOUSE: $95,000 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF YOUTH: $65,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetTHE FOSTER ALLIANCE: $50,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetHALO HELPING ANIMALS LIVE ON INC: $40,000 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetYakima Valley Pet Rescue and Adoption Center: $35,000 over 6y, 5.2% of budgetFOOD LIFELINE: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNORTHWEST HARVEST EMM: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE HADASSAH FOUNDATION INC: $18,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetTHE HUMANE SOCIETY FOR SEATTLEKING COUNTY: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetArizona Humane Society: $15,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetSEATTLE WIND SYMPHONY: $13,500 over 3y, 38% of budgetPLYMOUTH HOUSING GROUP AND SUBSIDIARIES: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWELLSPRING FAMILY SERVICES: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetROD'S HOUSE: $5,000 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 JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE ↗
  • Who funds FOUNDATION FOR ANGELMAN SYNDROME THERAPEUTICS ↗
  • Who funds JEWISH FEDERATION OF GREATER SEATTLE ↗
  • Who funds TREEHOUSE ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF YOUTH ↗
  • Who funds THE FOSTER ALLIANCE ↗
  • Who funds HALO HELPING ANIMALS LIVE ON INC ↗
  • Who funds Yakima Valley Pet Rescue and Adoption Center ↗
  • Who funds FOOD LIFELINE ↗
  • Who funds NORTHWEST HARVEST EMM ↗
  • Who funds THE HADASSAH FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds THE HUMANE SOCIETY FOR SEATTLEKING COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds Arizona Humane Society ↗
  • Who funds SEATTLE WIND SYMPHONY ↗
  • Who funds PLYMOUTH HOUSING GROUP AND SUBSIDIARIES ↗
  • Who funds WELLSPRING FAMILY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds ROD'S HOUSE ↗

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.

United Way WorldwideVA12.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way Worldwide · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · National Philanthropic Trust · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation 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 Karen and Gary Schwartz Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Karen and Gary Schwartz Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 29 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 Karen and Gary Schwartz’s filings →

    More from the funding graph