Skip to content
Ordinary People Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Ordinary People Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$225k
Granted FY2024still arriving
14
Grants FY2024still arriving
6
States reached
$30k
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, FY2020 to 2024.

Environment$454kCivil Rights$160kPublic Benefit$82kCommunity Improvement$43kPhilanthropy$31kScience & Tech$5kArts & Culture$5kRecreation & Sports$1k
02FY2024 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k5 grants · $10k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $215k
$20,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$2.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Clean Energy Transition Institute$30,000
ACLU Foundation$30,000
Sightline Institute$30,000
Heartland Fund$25,000
Represent Us Education Fund$25,000
Conservation Northwest$20,000
Hopewell Fund$20,000
Fuse Innovation Fund$20,000
Sustainable Markets Foundations$15,000
The Urbanist Fund$5,000
Fairvote Washington Foundation$2,000
350 Seattle$1,000
Fannie and John Hertz Foundation$1,000
Cascade Bicycle Club$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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 46% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 9%Represent Us Education Foundation: $15k → 12%Represent Us Education Fund: $25k → 16%Fannie and John Hertz Foundation: $1k → 10%Sustainable Markets Foundations: $15k → 17%Hopewell Fund: $20k → 14%New Georgia Organizing: $20k → 14%Clean Energy Transition Institute: $30k → 9%Rural People's Platform: $3k → 17%Represent Us Education Foundation: $10k → 12%Fannie and John Hertz Foundation: $1k → 10%ACLU Foundation: $30k → 17%Winward Fund: $15k → 14%Clean Energy Transition Institute: $20k → 9%Represent Us Education Foundation: $10k → 12%Fannie and John Hertz Foundation: $1k → 10%ACLU Foundation: $30k → 17%Winward Fund: $10k → 14%Sightline Institute: $20k → 9%Fannie and John Hertz Foundation: $1k → 10%ACLU Foundation: $30k → 17%Clean Energy Transition Institute: $20k → 9%Fannie and John Hertz Foundation: $1k → 10%ACLU Foundation: $30k → 17%Sightline Institute: $20k → 9%ACLU Foundation: $30k → 17%Sightline Institute: $20k → 9%Clean Energy Transition Institute: $15k → 9%Social Justice Fund: $10k → 9%Washington Progress Fund: $6k → 9%Washington Progress Fund: $5k → 9%Washington Environmental Council: $1k → 9%Washington Environmental Council: $1k → 9%Sightline Institute: $30k → 9%Washington Environmental Council: $1k → 9%Sightline Institute: $20k → 9%Climate Solutions: $500 → 9%350 Seattle: $20k → 9%Cascade Bicycle Club: $500 → 9%The Urbanist Fund: $5k → 9%Conservation Northwest: $20k → 9%Conservation Northwest: $15k → 9%Conservation Northwest: $10k → 9%Conservation Northwest: $10k → 9%350 Seattle: $20k → 9%Clean Energy Transition Institute: $10k → 9%350 Seattle: $10k → 9%350 Seattle: $1k → 9%350 Seattle: $1k → 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.
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 Ordinary People Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 57% of the giving stays in WA; by stated purpose, 50%.

Ordinary People Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 7.0% 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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$655k · 12 repeat orgs$80k to everyone else

12 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
4

Total granted

$655k
$33k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+66%
+88%

Still filing today

83%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 77% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $47k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentPublic BenefitCivil RightsEducationPhilanthropyCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $150k · revenue +65%
  • SI
    Sightline Institute
    5× · 2020–2024 · $110k · revenue +94%
  • CE
    Clean Energy Transition Institute
    5× · 2020–2024 · $95k · revenue +32%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $20k
  • SJ
    Social Justice Fund
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
  • RP
    Rural Peoples Platform
    one grant, 2023 · $3k · revenue +2%
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
Invest in Washington Now Campaign

Advocate for tax policy in Washington State

—
2
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…

—
3
Center for Environmental Law & Policy

The Center for Environmental Law & Policy is a statewide organization whose mission is to protect, preserve and restore Washington's waters through education, advocacy, policy reform, and public interest litigation.

Environment
4
Spark Northwest

Founded in 2001, Spark Northwest accelerates the just transition to clean energy in the Pacific Northwest. Spark Northwest uses two primary strategies: (1) on-the-ground project consulting, focusing on communities with limited financial…

Environment
5
The Urbanist

Seattle-based online publication seeking to examine and influence urban policies.

Community Improvement
6
Washingtonians for Public Banking

Washingtonians for Public banking promotes education and civic engagement on public banking and banking reform within Washington state. The organization organizes, educates, and advocates for the establishment of public banking, and…

Community Improvement
7
Fuse Washington

To achieve progress through government,by the people, and for the people, in Washington state.

Environment
8
Partnership for Policy Integrity

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

Environment
9
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…

—
10
Pro-Choice Washington Foundation

The Pro-Choice Washington Foundation is our 501c3 focused on issue research, leadership development, and community and decision-maker education.

Civil Rights
11
Re Sources

RE Sources mobilizes people of Northwest Washington to build just and thriving communities and to protect the land, water, and climate on which we all depend.

Environment
12
Cascade Climate Inc

To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sightline Institute; the most unlike its peers is The Urbanist Fund. 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 22 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
11/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Sightline Institute: $110,000 · EnvironmentSightline InstituteFuse Innovation Fund: $98,000 · EnvironmentFuse Innovation FundCONSERVATION NW: $55,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION NW350 Seattle: $52,000 · Environment350 SeattleWINDWARD FUND: $25,000 · EnvironmentWINDWARD FUNDSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION: $15,000 · Environment+1 more: $3,000 · EnvironmentAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $150,000 · Civil RightsAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERT…Heartland Fund: $40,000 · OtherHeartland FundRepresent Us Education Foundation: $35,000 · OtherRepresent Us Edu…Individual grant recipient: $20,000 · OtherIndividual grant…Social Justice Fund: $10,000 · OtherSocial Justice F…FANNIE AND JOHN HERTZ FOUNDATION: $5,000 · Other+3 more: $3,500 · OtherClean Energy Transition Institute: $95,000 · EducationClean Energy …HOPEWELL FUND: $20,000 · PhilanthropyWashington Progress Fund: $11,000 · PhilanthropyRepresentUs Education Fund: $25,000 · Public BenefitTHE URBANIST FUND: $5,000 · Public BenefitRural Peoples Platform: $2,500 · Community Improvement
Environment$358,000Civil Rights$150,000Other$113,500Education$95,000Philanthropy$31,000Public Benefit$30,000Community Improvement$2,500

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 budgetAMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION INC: $150,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetSightline Institute: $110,000 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetFuse Innovation Fund: $98,000 over 5y, 1.8% of budgetClean Energy Transition Institute: $95,000 over 5y, 3.5% of budgetCONSERVATION NW: $55,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budget350 Seattle: $52,000 over 5y, 2.2% of budgetRepresentUs Education Fund: $25,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetWINDWARD FUND: $25,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHOPEWELL FUND: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSUSTAINABLE MARKETS FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWashington Progress Fund: $11,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetFANNIE AND JOHN HERTZ FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetTHE URBANIST FUND: $5,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND: $3,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetRural Peoples Platform: $2,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetFAIRVOTE WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetCascade Bicycle Club: $1,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCLIMATE SOLUTIONS: $500 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 FoundationStolte Family Foundat…The Bullitt FoundationThe GreerSolien FundRidge Road FoundationImpactassetsincTides FoundationKaleidoscope Foundati…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Sustainable Path Foun…David & Cathy Habib F…Kaphan Foundation
Seattle FoundationWA24.3× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seattle Foundation · Stolte Family Foundation · The Bullitt Foundation · The GreerSolien Fund · Ridge Road Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Tides Foundation · Kaleidoscope Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Sustainable Path Foundation · David & Cathy Habib Foundation · Kaphan 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 Ordinary People Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Ordinary People Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
    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 Ordinary People Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Ordinary People 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 22 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Ordinary People’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