Skip to content
Maria Norbury Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Maria Norbury Foundation

Its FY2019 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$53k
Granted FY2019
10
Grants FY2019
6
States reached
$17k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2019.

Animals$243kHuman Services$34kEnvironment$27k
02FY2019 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2019

  • Under $10k8 grants · $23k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $30k
$4,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Animals Asia Foundation$17,000
Wenatchee Valley Humane Society$13,000
Tiger Sanctuaries Inc$5,000
Wenatchee River Institute$4,000
World Vets$4,000
Pawsitive Alliance$3,500
Chelan Douglas Land Trust$2,000
Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries$2,000
International Spay Neuter Network$1,000
Earth Island Institute$1,000
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.

US giving: 90% of grant dollars ($273k). The need read here covers only this US portion; the 10% that went abroad ($31k) is mapped below.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–19) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 97% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%International Fund for Animal Welfare: $3k → 8%Animal Grantmakers: $5k → 10%Animals Asia Foundation: $23k → 10%Farm Animal Sanctuary: $100 → 12%Tiger Sanctuaries Inc: $5k → 17%Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries: $13k → 14%International Spay Neuter Network: $6k → 13%Pan African Sanctuary Alliance: $6k → 12%Savory Institute: $10k → 12%Animal People: $5k → 7%Pawsitive Alliance: $5k → 9%Feral Cat SpayNeuter Project: $5k → 9%Wenatchee River Institute: $4k → 9%Kitsap Humane Society: $5k → 10%Prevent Homeless Pets: $3k → 11%World Vets: $30k → 12%Trust For Conservation Innovation: $5k → 10%Animals Asia Foundation: $20k → 10%Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries: $9k → 14%International Spay Neuter Network: $5k → 13%Pan African Sanctuary Alliance: $5k → 12%Pawsitive Alliance: $4k → 9%Feral Cat SpayNeuter Project: $5k → 9%Wenatchee River Institute: $3k → 9%World Vets: $15k → 12%Earth Island Institute: $1k → 10%Animals Asia Foundation: $17k → 10%Global Federation of Animal Sanctuaries: $2k → 14%International Spay Neuter Network: $1k → 13%Wenatchee River Institute: $1k → 9%World Vets: $4k → 12%Okandogs: $14k → 9%Wenatchee Valley Humane Society: $13k → 9%Wenatchee Valley Humane Society: $10k → 9%Wenatchee Valley Humane Society: $10k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
ND
NY
MA
OR
CA
CO
DC
FL

Beyond the US: 10% of all-years giving ($31k)

3 countries, by the recipient’s country on the filing.

grant dollars sentlessmore
Costa Rica$16k · 2 grants
South Africa$10k · 1 grant
Netherlands$5k · 1 grant
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. International giving is mapped by the recipient’s country from the same 990 filings; comparable need data isn’t available at that grain.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 8% of Maria Norbury Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Maria Norbury Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 13% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

77%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$234k · 11 repeat orgs$71k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +106% since the first grant, against +11% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2019, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
11

Total granted

$234k
$65k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+106%
+11%

Still filing today

73%
73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19
AnimalsEnvironmentArts & 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

  • GF
    GLOBAL FEDERATION OF ANIMAL SANCTUARIES
    3× · 2017–2019 · $24k · revenue +78%
  • PA
    PAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $11k · revenue +106%
  • FC
    Feral Cat SpayNeuter Project
    2× · 2017–2018 · $10k · revenue +289%

Funded once

  • O
    OKANDOGSgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $14k · revenue +32%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • SI
    SAVORY INSTITUTEORG INC
    one grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue -67%
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
Global Animal Partnership
Animals
2
World Vets

To improve the health & well-being of animals through veterinary aid, response, training, research & local capacity building worldwide. We provide services to companion animals, horses, street dogs, livestock and marine animals including…

Animals
3
Progressive Animal Welfare Society aka Paws

A champion for animals since 1967, PAWS is a nationally recognized leader - rehabilitating injured and orphaned wildlife, sheltering and adopting homeless cats and dogs, and educating people to make a better world for animals and people.

Animals
4
Humane World for Animals International

HUMANE WORLD FOR ANIMALS INTERNATIONAL, FKA HUMANE SOCIETY INTERNATIONAL (HSI), works around the globe to promote the human-animal bond, rescue and protect dogs and cats, improve farm animal welfare, protect wildlife, promote animal-free…

Animals
5
Animal Diplomacy

Supporting and assisting with rescue, sheltering, spay/neuter, and rehoming of cats and dogs in needy developing countries. Our current exclusive focus is on Egypt and the Egyptian Society for Mercy to Animals.

Animals
6
Animal Rescuers Without Borders

Battling against the overpopulation of homeless pets and improving the lives of companion animals through rescue, fostering programs, adoption, pet care, educational programs and of course spaying and neutering.

Animals
7
Idaho Animal Rescue Network

Idaho Animal Rescue Network is a 501(c)(3) non-profit based in Idaho that works in Idaho and Eastern Washington to educate, advocate, and network with other rescues and law enforcement in Idaho regarding animal cruelty and neglect. We are…

Animals
8
Jet Wag Animal Rescue Inc

Our mission is to move adoptable dogs and cats primarily from heavily-burdened areas to loving homes. We work with trusted partners throughout the country and around the world and facilitate vet care, transport, and adoptions to help…

Animals
9
Beaverhead Animal Shelter

The mission is to protect and care for homeless animals in the Dillon and Beaverhead county area.

Animals
10
Wild Welfare Us

To end the suffering of captive wild animals around the world, by uniting the world's leading animal welfare organizations and captive wildlife facilities in providing expert, practical, and sustainable solutions to improve animal welfare.

Animals
11
Forever Wild Wildlife Rescue
Animals
12
Anas Safe Haven Rescue Inc

Animal Welfare

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wenatchee Valley Humane Society Inc; the most unlike its peers is Tiger Sanctuaries Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

18 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. 18 of the 24 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
12/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Asia Wild: $59,700 · AnimalsAsia WildWENATCHEE VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $33,000 · AnimalsWENATCHEE VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY INCGLOBAL FEDERATION OF ANIMAL SANCTUARIES: $23,500 · AnimalsGLOBAL FEDERATION OF ANIMAL SANCTUARIESOKANDOGS: $13,500 · AnimalsOKANDOGSPAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INC: $11,000 · AnimalsPAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INCFeral Cat SpayNeuter Project: $10,000 · AnimalsFeral Cat SpayNeuter ProjectPAWSITIVE ALLIANCE: $8,300 · Animals+5 more: $21,000 · Animals+5 moreWorld Vets: $49,000 · OtherWorld VetsIndividual grant recipient: $16,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientINTERNATIONAL SPAY NEUTER NETWORK INC: $12,000 · OtherINTERNATIONAL SPAY NEUTER NETWORK …Individual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+1 more: $100 · OtherSAVORY INSTITUTEORG INC: $10,000 · EnvironmentMULTIPLIER: $5,000 · EnvironmentCHELAN-DOUGLAS LAND TRUST: $3,000 · EnvironmentEarth Island Institute Inc: $1,000 · EnvironmentWENATCHEE RIVER INSTITUTE: $8,000 · Arts & CultureAnimal People Inc: $5,000 · Arts & Culture
Animals$180,000Other$92,100Environment$19,000Arts & Culture$13,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetAsia Wild: $59,700 over 3y, 1.1% of budgetWENATCHEE VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY INC: $33,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetGLOBAL FEDERATION OF ANIMAL SANCTUARIES: $23,500 over 3y, 2.4% of budgetPAN AFRICAN SANCTUARY ALLIANCE INC: $11,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetFeral Cat SpayNeuter Project: $10,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetSAVORY INSTITUTEORG INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPAWSITIVE ALLIANCE: $8,300 over 2y, 4.7% of budgetWENATCHEE RIVER INSTITUTE: $8,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetTIGER SANCTUARIES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetKITSAP HUMANE SOCIETY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMULTIPLIER: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPrevent Homeless Pets: $3,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetCHELAN-DOUGLAS LAND TRUST: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEarth Island Institute Inc: $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.

The Summerlee Foundat…The American Society …Seattle FoundationCommunity Foundation …Humane World for Anim…Mightycause Charitabl…Petsmart Charities IncGe Aerospace Foundati…Morgan Stanley Global…American Online Givin…Paypal Charitable Giv…The Bank of America C…
The Summerlee FoundationTX15.5× affinity5 shared granteesties to 10 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Summerlee Foundation · The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals · Seattle Foundation · Community Foundation of Ncw · Humane World for Animals Inc · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Petsmart Charities Inc · Ge Aerospace Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc

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 Maria Norbury Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Maria Norbury 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%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 68%
  • Pan African Sanctuary Alliance Inc: 68% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Maria Norbury Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Maria Norbury Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

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 24 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Maria Norbury’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