Skip to content
Lance & Deborah Vander Hoek Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Lance & Deborah Vander Hoek 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.

$23k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$56kHuman Services$45kHealth$37kFood & Nutrition$14kEnvironment$10kYouth Development$5kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$137k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Assumption Catholic School$5,000
Whatcom Hospice Foundation$5,000
Tunnel to Towers Foundation$5,000
Upper Valley Mend$2,500
Wounded Warrior Project$2,500
Blaine Food Bank Association$2,500
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 (FY17–17, $5k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%HOPELINK: $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.

82%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$141k · 9 repeat orgs$30k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
6

Total granted

$141k
$30k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+39%
+145%

Still filing today

89%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
HealthHuman ServicesEducationArts & CultureOther
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

  • WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $40k · revenue +90%
  • TW
    THE WHATCOM HOSPICE FOUNDATION
    3× · 2023–2025 · $12k · revenue +29%
  • WR
    WENATCHEE RIVER INSTITUTE
    2× · 2017–2022 · $10k · revenue +179%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
  • HK
    HILLCREST KIDS
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDRENgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +120%
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
Uw Physicians Network

To improve the health of the public.

Education
2
Seattle Children's Hospital

Seattle children's hospital (seattle children's) will be an innovative leader in pediatric health and wellness through our unsurpassed quality, clinical care, relentless spirit of inquiry, and compassion for all children and their…

Health
3
The Association of Chrmc and University Physicians

Children's university medical group (cumg) is the non-profit pediatric group practice established to support the academic, research and clinical missions of its corporate members, university of washington school of medicine (uwsom) and…

Health
4
Swedish Edmonds

Swedish edmonds is part of swedish health services, a healthcare system committed to meeting the health-care needs of snohomish county.

Health
5
Western Healthconnect

Support significant improvements in health care delivery and outcomes within the context of nonprofit, charitable ownership.

Health
6
Western University of Health Sciences

To produce, in a humanistic tradition, health care professionals and biomedical knowledge that will enhance and extend the quality of life in our communities.

—
7
Seattle Children's Healthcare System

Seattle children's healthcare system (schs) is engaged in activities relating to the provision of health care services to infants, children, and adolescents, delivering and improving the delivery and the quality of those services through…

Health
8
Wenatchee Valley Hospital

We are dedicated to improving our patients' health by providing safe, high-quality care in a compassionate and cost-effective manner.

—
9
Salem Health Hospitals & Clinics

To support salem health, salem health west valley and related organizations.

—
10
Southwestern Vermont Healthcare Foundation Inc

The sole purpose of the svhc foundation shall be to engage in development and fundraising activities exclusively for the support of the southwestern vermont health care corporation and affiliates.

Health
11
Southwestern Vermont Medical Center

Southwestern vermont health care exists to provide exceptional health care and comfort to the people we serve. see schedule o for additional details.

Health
12
The Association of University Physicians

The association of university physicians is a clinical practice plan for the university of washington school of medicine ("uwsom") faculty physicians and non-physician practitioners and provides substantial support to the uwsom.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Seattle Children's Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Hillsdale College. 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

13 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. 13 of the 16 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
11/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Assumption Catholic School: $35,000 · OtherAssumption Catholic SchoolBLAINE FOOD BANK ASSOCIATION: $7,000 · OtherBLAINE FOOD BANK ASSOCIATIONUPPER VALLEY MEND: $7,000 · OtherUPPER VALLEY MENDIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientHILLCREST KIDS: $5,000 · OtherHILLCREST KIDSSeattle Children's Foundation: $5,000 · OtherSeattle Children's FoundationWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $40,000 · Human ServicesWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INCHOPELINK: $5,000 · Human ServicesHOPELINKTHE WHATCOM HOSPICE FOUNDATION: $12,000 · HealthTHE WHATCOM HOSPICE F…CASCADE MEDICAL FOUNDATION: $10,000 · HealthCASCADE MEDICAL FOUND…SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $5,000 · HealthSHRINERS HOSPITALS FO…ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $5,000 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RE…Upper Valley Christian School: $10,000 · EducationUpper Valley …STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $9,500 · EducationSTEPHEN SILLE…HILLSDALE COLLEGE: $1,000 · EducationWENATCHEE RIVER INSTITUTE: $10,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$64,000Human Services$45,000Health$32,000Education$20,500Arts & Culture$10,000

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 budgetWOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT INC: $40,000 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetTHE WHATCOM HOSPICE FOUNDATION: $12,000 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetWENATCHEE RIVER INSTITUTE: $10,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetCASCADE MEDICAL FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 2y, 3.9% of budgetSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $9,500 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetBLAINE FOOD BANK ASSOCIATION: $7,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetUPPER VALLEY MEND: $7,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetSHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHOPELINK: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSeattle Children's Foundation: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHILLSDALE COLLEGE: $1,000 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.

Seattle FoundationDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Seattle FoundationWA13.1× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seattle Foundation · 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 Lance & Deborah Vander Hoek Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lance & Deborah Vander Hoek 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%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Wounded Warrior Project Inc: 0% of income from government
  • Shriners Hospitals for Children: 0% of 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 · 0–10%
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 16 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 Lance & Deborah Vander Hoek’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