Skip to content
Madrona Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Madrona 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.

$1.6M
Granted FY2020
8
Grants FY2020
4
States reached
$1.4M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

93% of Madrona Foundation’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 1 organization directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2020, the last year Madrona Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $2M. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

10
’19
5
’20
3
’21
4
’22
3
’23
1
’25

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2023.

Civil Rights$1.5MPublic Benefit$535kPhilanthropy$294kInternational$140kHuman Services$56kEnvironment$50kFood & Nutrition$18kHealth$14kOther$0
02FY2020 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2020

  • $10k–50k6 grants · $60k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $200k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.4M
$10,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$12M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Free Speech For People$1,375,000
Voter Participation Center$200,000
Individual grant recipient$10,000
Women for Women International$10,000
Just Vision$10,000
DAWN$10,000
NWIRP$10,000
DESC$10,000
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 (FY19–23, $20k) 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%Lifewire: $10k → 9%LIFEWIRE: $5k → 9%The Sophia Way: $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.

78%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.9M · 8 repeat orgs$545k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +41% since the first grant, against +22% for those funded once.

8 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2020, 2 since wound down; 13 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call). Read against FY2020, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
6

Total granted

$1.9M
$201k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+41%
+22%

Still filing today

63%
83%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’25
InternationalHuman ServicesCivil RightsEnvironmentScience & TechYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • FS
    FREE SPEECH FOR PEOPLE INC
    3× · 2019–2025 · $1.5M · revenue +142% · 44% of their budget
  • TV
    THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER
    2× · 2019–2020 · $310k · revenue +96%
  • L
    LifeWire
    3× · 2019–2023 · $22k · revenue +9%

Funded once

  • VR
    VOTER REGISTRATION PROJECTgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $100k · revenue +50%
  • NE
    National Election Defense Coalition
    one grant, 2019 · $75k
  • NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INCgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +37%
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
Western Resource Advocates

Western Resource Advocates (WRA) is a regional nonprofit advocacy organization fighting climate change and its impacts to sustain the environment, economy, and people of the West. As the region's go-to experts for more than three decades,…

Crime & Legal
2
Nw Energy Coalition

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…

—
3
Working Washington

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…

—
4
Partnership for Policy Integrity

Partnership for Policy Integrity (PFPI) uses data-driven advocacy and litigation to fight for forests, communities and the climate.

Environment
5
Women Donors Network

Women donors network advances a just, equitable, and sustainable world through the power of philanthropy, women's leadership, and collective and individual action.

Philanthropy
6
Washington Progress Fund

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…

Philanthropy
7
CarbonPlan

Improving the transparency and scientific integrity of climate solutions through open data and tools.

Environment
8
International Center for Research On Women

The international center for research for women (icrw) is a global research institute, with a mission to advance rights and opportunities for women, girls, and structurally excluded populations with actionable evidence and solutions.

International
9
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
10
Lavender Rights Project

Lavender Rights Project elevates the power, autonomy, and leadership of the black intersex & gender diverse community through intersectional legal and social services. We utilize the law as an organizing principle to affirm our civil…

Crime & Legal
11
Seeding Justice

Seeding justice builds collective power by transforming philanthropy and funding movements, in the pursuit of justice and liberation for all communities. our programs are based on trust, relationships, and partnership. they are founded on…

Philanthropy
12
International Womens Writing Guild

IWWG empowers women writers with workshops events and community gatherings to encourage writing speaking and publishing

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Voter Registration Project; the most unlike its peers is Natural Resources Defense Council Inc. 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

20 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. 20 of the 28 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)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
16/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FREE SPEECH FOR PEOPLE INC: $1,470,000 · Civil RightsFREE SPEECH FOR PEOPLE INCTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $310,000 · Civil RightsTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTERVANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM: $548,000 · PhilanthropyVANGUARD CHARITABLE …VOTER REGISTRATION PROJECT: $100,000 · OtherVOTER REGISTRATIO…Individual grant recipient: $100,000 · OtherIndividual grant …National Election Defense Coalition: $75,000 · OtherNational Election…The Center for Investigative Reporting: $50,000 · OtherThe Center for In…NWIRP: $29,000 · OtherNWIRP+10 more: $98,000 · Other+10 moreWashington Physicians for Social Responsibility: $100,000 · InternationalJust Vision Inc: $20,000 · InternationalWOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL: $15,000 · International+1 more: $1,000 · InternationalLifeWire: $22,000 · Human ServicesDOMESTIC ABUSE WOMEN'S NETWORK: $10,000 · Human ServicesTHE SOPHIA WAY: $5,000 · Human ServicesFarmore WA: $12,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $10,000 · EnvironmentWA THERAPY FUND FOUNDATION: $14,000 · Health
Civil Rights$1,780,000Philanthropy$548,000Other$452,000International$136,000Human Services$37,000Environment$22,000Health$14,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetFREE SPEECH FOR PEOPLE INC: $1,470,000 over 3y, 44% of budgetVANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM: $548,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER: $310,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetVOTER REGISTRATION PROJECT: $100,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWashington Physicians for Social Responsibility: $100,000 over 1y, 16% of budgetLifeWire: $22,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetJust Vision Inc: $20,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetNORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWOMEN FOR WOMEN INTERNATIONAL: $15,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetWA THERAPY FUND FOUNDATION: $14,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetNEW BEGINNINGS: $14,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFarmore WA: $12,000 over 1y, 19% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDOMESTIC ABUSE WOMEN'S NETWORK: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCOLLABORISING INC: $6,500 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetBLACK FARMERS COLLECTIVE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetTHE SOPHIA WAY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBread for the World Institute: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCLIMATE SCIENCE LEGAL DEFENSE FUND: $1,000 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.

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 FoundationUnited Way of King Co…ImpactassetsincAven FoundationPeg and Rick Young Fo…Moccasin Lake Foundat…Medina FoundationEmployees Community F…The Norcliffe Foundat…Puget Sound Energy Fo…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Vanguard Charitable E…
Seattle FoundationWA22.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seattle Foundation · United Way of King County · Impactassetsinc · Aven Foundation · Peg and Rick Young Foundation · Moccasin Lake Foundation · Medina Foundation · Employees Community Fund of the Boeing Company · The Norcliffe Foundation · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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 Madrona Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Madrona Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 28 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Madrona’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