· Public charity
NW Childrens Foundation
To end the intergenerational cycle of child abuse, neglect and trauma.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k5 grants · $41k
- $10k–50k58 grants · $758k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Lydia Place | $33,150 |
| Child Advocacy Center | $33,150 |
| Friends of Youth | $33,000 |
| TeamChild | $33,000 |
| Multi-Service Center | $18,000 |
| Refugee Womens Alliance | $17,000 |
| Together | $17,000 |
| Sherwood Community Services | $16,000 |
| Whatcom Cntr for Early Learn | $16,000 |
| Skookum Kids | $16,000 |
| Domestic Violence Services | $16,000 |
| The Coffee Oasis | $15,000 |
| St Stephen Housing Assoc | $15,000 |
| YWCA Seattle King Snohomish | $15,000 |
| Denise Louie Education Center | $15,000 |
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 (FY18–25, $2.5M) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 95% of those 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.
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 +44% since the first grant, against +37% for the ones you funded once.
98 repeat relationships — 55 still active in FY2025, 43 since wound down; 8 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, 84% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $124k 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
- DVDOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES OF SNOHOMISH6× · 2018–2025 · $169k · revenue +68%
- CACHILD ADVOCACY CENTER OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY7× · 2018–2025 · $165k · revenue +67%
- PTPARENT TRUST FOR WASHINGTON CHILDREN8× · 2018–2025 · $165k · revenue +14%
Funded once
- WSWASHINGTON STATE COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCEgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $30k · revenue +70%
CITY YEAR INCone grant, 2021 · $25k · revenue +4%- ICINTERCULTURAL CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICESgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $18k · revenue +458%
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.
Network services has been serving homeless families in the puget sound area since 1990, with a focus on families with children. network services aims to break the cycle of homelessness by providing assistance to families with children to…
SWYFS partners with youth and families to transform their futures.
Family solutions is a community based, comprehensive behavioral health provider cultivating the wellness of southwest washington by offering hope and health to children, youth and families.
Building changes advances equitable responses to homelessness in washington state, with a focus on children, youth, and families. we work at the intersection of housing, education, and health systems, partnering with communities and public…
Providing resources & services to vulnerable children and families to address overall well-being. family impact network ("fin") supports restorative and empowering efforts to transition under-resourced children and families from crisis to…
To protect children, support families, and bring hope and healing through compassionate, coordinated, and child-centered advocacy, through specialized programs and services, such as multi-disciplinary team coordination, forensic…
The organization operates primarily on the Southern Kenai Peninsula and its operations include the following:Community Mental Health - Counseling, evaluation, consultation and crisis mental health services for Adults and…
Child care aware of washington provides thorough and independent information and support for families seeking quality child care, for child care programs seeking to improve quality, and for effective policy making.
By advocating for quality early care and education, empowering families with information and financial support, and building the capabilities of educators, Children's Council of San Francisco ensures that every child in San Francisco has…
Youth progress is a nonprofit organization that is licensed as a child caring agency (cca) to serve youth ages 12-25 in the custody of the oregon youth authority (oya) or the oregon department of human services (dhs). youth progress uses…
YWCA Bellingham is part of a national network of programs with the shared mission of eliminating racism, empowering women, and promoting peace, justice, and freedom for all.
Provide outpatient mental and behavioral therapy for children and families, therapeutic treatment foster care to at risk youth, as well as a variety of parent training services.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Childrens Home Society of Washington and the most unlike its peers is Mother Mentors of Whidbey Island. 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 36 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% 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 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.
140 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. 140 of the 146 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 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES OF SNOHOMISH ↗
- Who funds CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY ↗
- Who funds PARENT TRUST FOR WASHINGTON CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds LYDIA PLACE ↗
- Who funds VINE MAPLE PLACE ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN - SEATTLE ↗
- Who funds Jumping Mouse Childrens Center ↗
- Who funds TREEHOUSE ↗
- Who funds THE MOCKINGBIRD SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds YOUTHCARE ↗
- Who funds King County Sexual Assault Resource Center ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF YOUTH ↗
- Who funds TeamChild ↗
- Who funds ENCOMPASS NORTHWEST ↗
- Who funds KINDERING CENTER ↗
- Who funds HOUSING HOPE ↗
- Who funds SAFEPLACE ↗
- Who funds CIS OF GREATER KING COUNTY DBA COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds BRIGID COLLINS HOUSE ↗
- Who funds COCOON HOUSE ↗
- Who funds Secret Harbor ↗
- Who funds AMARA ↗
- Who funds STEPS ↗
- Who funds Solid Ground Washington ↗
- Who funds FAMILY EDUCATION & SUPPORT SERVICES ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICES OF WESTERN WASHINGTON ↗
- Who funds Rochester Organization of Families ↗
- Who funds BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON ↗
- Who funds HopeSparks ↗
- Who funds SAFEFUTURES YOUTH CENTER ↗
- Who funds NEW PHOEBE HOUSE ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF LAKEWOOD INC ↗
- Who funds WELLSPRING FAMILY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds VISION HOUSE ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST YOUTH SERVICES ↗
- Who funds ROOTS YOUNG ADULT SHELTER ↗
- Who funds CHILDHAVEN ↗
- Who funds THE INTERFAITH ASSOCIATION OF NORTHWEST ↗
- Who funds ABUSED DEAF WOMEN'S ADVOCACY SERVICES ↗
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: Medina Foundation · The Norcliffe Foundation · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Seattle Foundation · United Way of King County · Liberty Mutual Foundation Inc · School's Out Washington · Lucky Seven Foundation · Employees Community Fund of the Boeing Company · Employees Community Fund of Boeing-Puget Sound · Washington Federal Foundation · Moccasin Lake 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 NW Childrens 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.
- City Year Inc — 11% of income from government
- Third Sector New England Inc — 3% 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.