· Private foundation
Kismet 805 Foundation
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2022.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| GOLDMAN SACHS PHILANTHROPY FUND - SILVERBERG DAF | $5,304,277 |
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 (FY17–21, $180k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 1% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +46% since the first grant, against +29% for the ones you funded once.
40 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2022, 40 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (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 FY2022, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5.3M 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
- JFJEWISH FAMILY SERVICE5× · 2017–2021 · $178k · revenue +107%
- UCUSA CYCLING INC5× · 2017–2021 · $95k · revenue +46%
- SCSeattle Children's Foundation5× · 2017–2021 · $65k · revenue +190%
Funded once
- CSCollege Success Foundationone grant, 2017 · $15k · revenue -30%
- OWOPEN WINDOW SCHOOLgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue +68%
- SHSeattle Hebrew Academygraduatedone grant, 2018 · $7k · revenue +29%
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.
Seattle University is dedicated to educating the whole person, to professional formation, and to empowering leaders for a just and humane world.
Arcs foundation advances science and technology in the united states by providing financial awards to academically outstanding u.s. citizens studying to complete degrees in science, engineering and medical research.
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
To produce, in a humanistic tradition, health care professionals and biomedical knowledge that will enhance and extend the quality of life in our communities.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
The mission of southern california university of health sciences (scu) is to educate students as competent, caring and successful practitioners of integrative healthcare. the university is committed to providing excellence in academics,…
Increase societal understanding of the earth system through scientific research and education.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Lewis & clark is a premier private higher education institution offering an exceptional education in an inclusive environment. by fostering critical thinking, innovation, creativity, civic engagement, and leadership, both inside and…
To research and develop centrist policy ideas.
WSAS provides expert scientific and engineering assessments to inform public policy making and works to increase the impact of research in Washington State.
To effectively and efficiently mitigate risks to the reliability and security of the western interconnection's bulk power system.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Seattle Children's Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Seattle Science Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 34 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 19% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% lost their exemption, against 10% 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.
32 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. 32 of the 51 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 JEWISH FAMILY SERVICE ↗
- Who funds BROWN UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds USA CYCLING INC ↗
- Who funds Seattle Children's Foundation ↗
- Who funds WORLDREADERORG ↗
- Who funds FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER RESEARCH CENTER ↗
- Who funds Seattle Science Foundation ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON TRAILS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds Washington Women in Need ↗
- Who funds PREECLAMPSIA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds NAMI National ↗
- Who funds Evergreen Mountain Bike Alliance ↗
- Who funds College Success Foundation ↗
- Who funds Shadhika Project ↗
- Who funds OPEN WINDOW SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance ↗
- Who funds Seattle Hebrew Academy ↗
- Who funds Carnegie Mellon University ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST HARVEST EMM ↗
- Who funds SKY ISLAND ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds EMPOWERS AFRICA INC ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE CENTER ↗
- Who funds Claremont McKenna College ↗
- Who funds CHILDHAVEN ↗
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: Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Seattle Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Charities Aid Foundation America · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc
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 Kismet 805 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.
- Preeclampsia Foundation Inc — 9% of income from government
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.