Skip to content
Riverstyx Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Riverstyx 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.

$1.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
47
Grants FY2024still arriving
14
States reached
$183k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0193% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$2.8MEnvironment$2.3MAnimals$1.9MEducation$858kCrime & Legal$597kCivil Rights$580kArts & Culture$519kReligion$444kOther$0
02FY2024 · 47 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k12 grants · $48k
  • $10k–50k26 grants · $506k
  • $50k–250k9 grants · $647k
$15,000
Median grant
14
States reached
$6.5M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Youth Passageways$183,000
Individual grant recipient$82,000
LIGARE INC$80,000
CLUSTERBUSTERS INC$52,000
Stichting Transnational Institute$50,000
Netherlands-America Foundation$50,000
Indigenous Medicine Conservation Fu$50,000
Indigenous Peyote Conservation Init$50,000
JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY DEVELOPMEN$50,000
Fireside Project$40,000
ECOLOGY ACTION OF SANTA CRUZ$40,000
SSDP Students for Sensible Drug Pol$35,000
Individual grant recipient$34,678
HEALING ADVOCACY FUND$30,000
MAPS$26,000
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.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–23, $362k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%BELOVED BUILDERS: $65k → 12%HOSPICE GIVING FOUNDATION: $3k → 12%BELOVED BUILDERS: $25k → 12%BELOVED BUILDERS: $25k → 12%SHADETREE MULTICULTURAL FOUNDATION: $3k → 14%SKAGIT VALLEY FAMILY YMCA: $5k → 11%HOMELESS GARDEN PROJECT: $30k → 13%FAR AWAY PROJECTS: $75k → 10%NORTHWEST YOUTH SERVICES: $50k → 12%OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL: $33k → 12%BRIGID COLLINS HOUSE: $17k → 12%WHATCOM FAMILY YMCA: $11k → 12%OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL: $10k → 12%WHATCOM COUNCIL ON AGING: $3k → 12%WHATCOM COUNCIL ON AGING: $3k → 12%OPPORTUNITY COUNCIL: $2k → 12%WHATCOM FAMILY YMCA: $1k → 12%WHATCOM FAMILY YMCA: $1k → 12%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
ID
MT
ND
MN
IL
WI
NY
MA
OR
WY
SD
PA
CA
UT
CO
MO
VA
MD
AZ
NM
DC
OK
LA
GA
TX
FL
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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

67%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$8.5M · 85 repeat orgs$4.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +51% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

85 repeat relationships: 18 still active in FY2024, 67 since wound down; 28 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

85
144

Total granted

$8.5M
$3.4M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
+15%

Still filing today

78%
49%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 38% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $744k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
HealthEducationEnvironmentAnimalsHuman ServicesArts & 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

  • MA
    MULTIDISCIPLINARY ASSOCIATION FOR PSYCHEDELIC STUDIES INC
    2× · 2017–2018 · $756k · revenue +42%
  • WH
    WOLF HAVEN INTERNATIONAL
    6× · 2017–2023 · $495k · revenue +14%
  • S
    STAND
    5× · 2017–2021 · $417k · revenue +157%

Funded once

  • OC
    OUR CHILDREN'S TRUST
    one grant, 2018 · $250k · revenue -81%
  • FM
    Footloose Montana
    one grant, 2023 · $115k · revenue -69% · 36% of their budget
  • FW
    FAIR WORLD PROJECT INC
    one grant, 2021 · $110k
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
Washington Wild

Washington wild protects and restores wild lands and waters in washington state through advocacy, education and civic engagement.

Animals
2
Washington Wildlife & Recreation Coalition

Creating a greener, healthier, more equitable, and better Washington for all through community outreach, network building, and advocacy for conservation and outdoor recreation funding.

—
3
Cowiche Canyon Conservancy

Protecting our shrub-steppe and connecting people to this vanishing landscape.

—
4
Western Rivers Conservancy

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…

Environment
5
10000 Years Institute

10,000 Years Institute evaluates the ecological effects of human activities on natural environments, and promotes the maintenance and restoration of ecological integrity through the integration of reliable scientific information, sound…

Unclassified
6
Fsc I&P

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.…

Philanthropy
7
Alaska Wildlife Alliance

Support ecosystem-based wildlife management by increasing public awareness of wildlife issues, responding to information requests, advocating for science-based wildlife habitat management through proposal and comment submissions, and…

Environment
8
Wildlife Conservation Network Inc

Connect conservationists and supporters, deploy resources to the field, provide conservationists with tools and support they need to succeed.

Animals
9
Clean Energy Transition Institute

The Clean Energy Transition Institute (CETI) is an independent, nonpartisan research and analysis nonprofit whose mission is to accelerate an equitable clean energy transition in the Northwest.

Education
10
Wildearth Guardians

Wildearth guardians works to protect and restore the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the american west.

Unclassified
11
Amazon Watch Inc

To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…

Environment
12
Futurewise

Futurewise works throughout Washington state to encourage healthy, equitable and opportunity-rich communities, and to protect our most valuable farmlands, forests and water resources through wise land use policies and practices.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Esalen Institute; the most unlike its peers is Seattle University. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

162 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. 162 of the 265 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.

10
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
49
Early backer (in before they grew)
157/162
Grantees still filing
110/162
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MAPS: $904,992 · OtherMAPSHeffter Research Institute Inc: $826,316 · OtherHeffter Research Institute IncCALIFORNIA WOLF CENTER: $302,500 · OtherCOMPASS HEALTH: $259,725 · OtherNATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC: $276,924 · Other+122 more: $4,334,472 · Other+122 moreSTAND: $416,500 · EnvironmentSTANDOUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $250,000 · EnvironmentOUR CHILDREN'…CONSERVATION NW: $160,000 · EnvironmentCONSERVATION …Sightline Institute: $110,000 · EnvironmentSightline Ins…Fuse Washington: $100,000 · EnvironmentFuse Washingt…Occidental Arts and Ecology Center: $88,100 · EnvironmentOccidental Ar…NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $85,000 · EnvironmentNATIONAL PARK…+10 more: $298,075 · Environment+10 moreWOLF HAVEN INTERNATIONAL: $494,500 · AnimalsWOLF HAVEN IN…WILD CANID SURVIVAL AND RESEARCH CENTER INC DBA ENDANGERED WOLF CENTER: $200,000 · AnimalsWILD CANID SU…NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $150,000 · AnimalsNATIONAL WILD…Footloose Montana: $115,000 · AnimalsFootloose Mon…LIVING WITH WOLVES LTD: $100,000 · AnimalsLIVING WITH W…NORTH FLORIDA WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $75,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY OF WICKENBURG: $60,000 · AnimalsWHATCOM HUMANE SOCIETY: $59,725 · AnimalsTrap Free Montana Inc: $50,000 · AnimalsPREDATOR DEFENSE: $50,000 · Animals+5 more: $139,725 · Animals+5 moreMULTIDISCIPLINARY ASSOCIATION FOR PSYCHEDELIC STUDIES INC: $755,890 · HealthMULTIDISCIP…CLUSTERBUSTERS INC CO VIRGINIA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LLC: $102,000 · HealthCLUSTERBUST…DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE: $75,000 · HealthDRUG POLICY…FINAL EXIT NETWORK INC: $70,000 · HealthWINGS PROGRAMS INC: $55,000 · HealthNYU LANGONE HOSPITALS: $50,000 · HealthDana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: $47,000 · Health+9 more: $186,780 · Health+9 moreRestoring Lifeways: $183,000 · Human ServicesBELOVED BUILDERS INC: $115,000 · Human ServicesFAR AWAY PROJECTS: $75,000 · Human ServicesHOMELESS GARDEN PROJECT: $75,000 · Human ServicesNORTHWEST YOUTH SERVICES: $50,000 · Human ServicesOPPORTUNITY COUNCIL: $45,000 · Human Services+3 more: $36,750 · Human ServicesINDIGENOUS MEDICINE CONSERVATION FUND: $512,000 · PhilanthropyTHE GIVING BACK FUND: $25,000 · Philanthropy+2 more: $19,000 · PhilanthropyYoga Behind Bars: $210,000 · EducationUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $100,000 · EducationWASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $85,000 · EducationFOUNDATION FOR WESTERN WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY AND ALUMNI: $42,500 · EducationGREEN BURIAL COUNCIL INTERNATIONAL: $20,000 · Education+7 more: $73,500 · Education
Other$6,904,929Environment$1,507,675Animals$1,493,950Health$1,341,670Human Services$579,750Philanthropy$556,000Education$531,000

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

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 budgetHeffter Research Institute Inc: $826,316 over 5y, 29% of budgetMULTIDISCIPLINARY ASSOCIATION FOR PSYCHEDELIC STUDIES INC: $755,890 over 2y, 4.2% of budgetINDIGENOUS MEDICINE CONSERVATION FUND: $512,000 over 3y, 16% of budgetWOLF HAVEN INTERNATIONAL: $494,500 over 6y, 9.9% of budgetSTAND: $416,500 over 5y, 3.9% of budgetCALIFORNIA WOLF CENTER: $302,500 over 3y, 14% of budgetNATIVE AMERICAN RIGHTS FUND INC: $276,924 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetCOMPASS HEALTH: $259,725 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetOUR CHILDREN'S TRUST: $250,000 over 1y, 6.1% of budgetYoga Behind Bars: $210,000 over 3y, 24% of budgetWILD CANID SURVIVAL AND RESEARCH CENTER INC DBA ENDANGERED WOLF CENTER: $200,000 over 3y, 4.6% of budgetRestoring Lifeways: $183,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetNorthern Rockies Conservation Cooperative: $175,000 over 2y, 12% of budgetWASHINGTON INNOCENCE PROJECT: $175,000 over 2y, 30% of budgetLIGARE INC: $162,000 over 2y, 29% of budgetCONSERVATION NW: $160,000 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $150,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetDEL E WEBB CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS: $125,000 over 2y, 4.7% of budgetSOCIAL JUSTICE FUND NORTHWEST: $120,000 over 2y, 1.9% of budgetFootloose Montana: $115,000 over 1y, 36% of budgetBELOVED BUILDERS INC: $115,000 over 3y, 3.8% of budgetSightline Institute: $110,000 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetFAIR WORLD PROJECT INC: $109,706 over 1y, 17% of budgetWOMEN MAKE MOVIES INC: $103,900 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetCLUSTERBUSTERS INC CO VIRGINIA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES LLC: $102,000 over 2y, 27% of budgetDISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTER OF KITSAP: $100,000 over 2y, 9.6% of budgetWickenburg Community Hospital Foundation: $100,000 over 1y, 30% of budgetUniversity of Arizona Foundation: $100,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFuse Washington: $100,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetLIVING WITH WOLVES LTD: $100,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetOccidental Arts and Ecology Center: $88,100 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION: $85,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCHUCKANUT HEALTH FOUNDATION: $81,250 over 4y, 3.6% of budgetFAR AWAY PROJECTS: $75,000 over 1y, 5.3% of budgetDRUG POLICY ALLIANCE: $75,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetPURPOSE DIGNITY ACTION: $75,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetHOMELESS GARDEN PROJECT: $75,000 over 4y, 2.6% of budgetNORTH FLORIDA WILDLIFE CENTER INC: $75,000 over 1y, 20% of budgetFINAL EXIT NETWORK INC: $70,000 over 2y, 7.7% of budgetTHE INTERNATIONAL DARK-SKY ASSOCIATION INC: $65,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetINDIGENOUS PEYOTE CONSERVATION INITATIVE: $60,000 over 2y, 5.3% of budgetHEROIC HEARTS PROJECT INC: $60,000 over 1y, 6.3% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY OF WICKENBURG: $60,000 over 4y, 11% of budgetWHATCOM HUMANE SOCIETY: $59,725 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetWINGS PROGRAMS INC: $55,000 over 3y, 34% of budgetHealing Advocacy Fund: $50,000 over 2y, 1.8% of budgetYELLOWSTONE ECOLOGICAL RESEARCH CENTER: $50,000 over 1y, 44% of budgetNORTHWEST YOUTH SERVICES: $50,000 over 1y, 1.7% 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.

Whatcom Community Fou…The Norcliffe Foundat…Puget Sound Energy Fo…Rangeland FoundationChuckanut Health Foun…Seattle FoundationNorth Sound Accountab…PeaceHealthMary H Storer Foundat…Mount Baker FoundationThe Joe & Sandy Sambe…The Skagit Community …
Whatcom Community FoundationWA59.6× affinity28 shared granteesties to 9 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Whatcom Community Foundation · The Norcliffe Foundation · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Rangeland Foundation · Chuckanut Health Foundation · Seattle Foundation · North Sound Accountable Community of Health · PeaceHealth · Mary H Storer Foundation · Mount Baker Foundation · The Joe & Sandy Samberg Foundation Inc · The Skagit Community 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 Riverstyx Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Riverstyx Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 80%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 7%
  • President and Fellows of Harvard College: 7% of income from government
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
8get no government money at all
31report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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 Riverstyx Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Riverstyx 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 265 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 Riverstyx’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