· Private foundation
Pine River 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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SWEDISH MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST | $5,000 |
| TROUT & SALMON FOUNDATION | $4,000 |
| MARY'S PLACE | $3,500 |
| NATURE CONSERVANCY OF WASHINGTON | $3,500 |
| NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL | $3,500 |
| IDAHO RIVERS UNITED | $3,000 |
| WASHINGTON WATER TRUST | $3,000 |
| WORLD WILDLIFE FUND | $3,000 |
| LONG LIVE THE KINGS | $3,000 |
| YELLOWSTONE FOREVER | $3,000 |
| NATURE CONSERVANCY OF WASHINGTON | $2,500 |
| DUCKS UNLIMTED | $2,000 |
| SEATTLE AQUARIUM ANNUAL FUND | $2,000 |
| BIRDS CONNECT SEATTLE | $1,500 |
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 (FY21–22, $2k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +66% since the first grant, against +27% for the ones you funded once.
30 repeat relationships — 21 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 4 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, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
SWEDISH MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION7× · 2019–2025 · $40k · revenue +191%- TATROUT AND SALMON FOUNDATION7× · 2019–2025 · $29k · revenue +27%
- LLLONG LIVE THE KINGS7× · 2019–2025 · $26k · revenue +112%
Funded once
- SVSun Valley Community School Incgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +56%
- EWETHEL WALKER SCHOOL INCgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +35%
- TUTROUT UNLIMITED INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $4k · revenue +81%
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 resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
Nedc's mission is to work toward a future in which the pacific northwest leads the nation in developing, implementing & enforcing strong laws and regulations that protect the environment & human health, and where our governments &…
Icl's mission is to create a conservation community and pragmatic, enduring solutions that protect and restore the air you breathe, the water you drink, and the land and wildlife you love.
Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
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…
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
Western rivers conservancy's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states. continued on schedule o.we acquire land to conserve critical habitat, provide public access for compatible use and enjoyment, and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wild Salmon Center and the most unlike its peers is Maris Place. 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 38 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% 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 12% 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.
59 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. 59 of the 76 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 SWEDISH MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds TROUT AND SALMON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LONG LIVE THE KINGS ↗
- Who funds IDAHO RIVERS UNITED ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds PUGET SOUND RESTORATION FUND ↗
- Who funds Maris Place ↗
- Who funds ISLAND CONSERVATION ↗
- Who funds CONSERVATION NW ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN RIVERS INC ↗
- Who funds WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO ↗
- Who funds FOOD LIFELINE ↗
- Who funds HOOD CANAL SALMON ENHANCEMENT GROUP ↗
- Who funds CAPE ELEUTHERA FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds YELLOWSTONE FOREVER ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds WILD SALMON CENTER ↗
- Who funds Ducks Unlimited Inc ↗
- Who funds Sun Valley Community School Inc ↗
- Who funds The Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds ETHEL WALKER SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON WATER TRUST ↗
- Who funds TROUT UNLIMITED INC ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds FARESTART ↗
- Who funds ASSISTANCE DOGS OF HAWAII ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL ALLIANCE FOR RESEARCH ON SCHIZOPHRENIA AND DEPRESSION ↗
- Who funds CAST (CATCH A SPECIAL THRILL) FOR KIDS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
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: Seattle Foundation · The Bullitt Foundation · Moccasin Lake Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The Russell Family Foundation · Lucky Seven Foundation · The Norcliffe Foundation · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Peach Foundation · Wyman Youth Trust · Grousemont Foundation · Windermere 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 Pine River 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.
- Wild Salmon Center — 49% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Pine River Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Pine River 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.