· Private foundation
McGrath Family 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $22k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $116k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $150k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OREGON PUBLIC BROADCASTING | $100,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF ROCKY MTNS | $50,000 |
| COLORADO PUBLIC RADIO | $25,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD COLUMBIAWILLAME | $23,696 |
| OREGON FOOD BANK | $20,000 |
| WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY | $20,000 |
| DENVER INNER CITY PARISH | $15,000 |
| NATURE CONSERVANCY OF COLORADO | $12,000 |
| VILLAGE HEALTH PARTNERSHIP | $6,000 |
| SEA SHEPHERD CONSERVATION SOCIETY | $5,000 |
| EARTH JUSTICE | $5,000 |
| WEST HIGH SCHOOL | $5,000 |
| DENVER ANIMAL SHELTER | $697 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 74% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
30 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 24 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $131k 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
- TWTHE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY6× · 2020–2025 · $727k · revenue +56%
EARTHJUSTICE7× · 2018–2024 · $263k · revenue +114%- CWCLEAN WATER FUND5× · 2020–2024 · $200k · revenue +20%
Funded once
- UOUNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $200k · revenue +79%
- KDKENT DENVER COUNTRY DAY SCHOOLgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $142k · revenue +75%
- FRFRONT RANGE CENTER FOR NERO DIVERSITYone grant, 2017 · $100k
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.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
The organization's mission is to conserve and promote new england's native plants to ensure healthy, biologically diverse landscapes.
Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
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.…
The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
To sustain, restore, and enhance the nation's fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats.
Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
Wildearth guardians works to protect and restore the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the american west.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood Inc and the most unlike its peers is Village Health Partnership. 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 48 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
26 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. 26 of the 50 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 THE WILD ANIMAL SANCTUARY ↗
- Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CLEAN WATER FUND ↗
- Who funds BATEMAN HORNE CENTER OF EXCELLENCE ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds OREGON FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds KENT DENVER COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds PUBLIC BROADCASTING OF COLORADO INC ↗
- Who funds American Forests ↗
- Who funds OREGON PUBLIC BROADCASTING ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK OF THE ROCKIES ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN PLANNED PARENTHOOD INC ↗
- Who funds Deschutes Land Trust ↗
- Who funds Rodale Institute ↗
- Who funds American Bird Conservancy ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds VILLAGE HEALTH PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds GREENWOOD WILDLIFE REHABILITATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds JANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION ↗
- Who funds THE CORNUCOPIA INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE EARTH ↗
- Who funds Denver Inner City Parish Inc ↗
- Who funds ORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION ↗
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: National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
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 McGrath Family 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.
- Deschutes Land Trust — 46% of income from government
- Oregon Food Bank — 21% of income from government
- Oregon Public Broadcasting — 1% 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.