Skip to content
Roma Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Roma Charitable 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.

$2.3M
Granted FY2024still arriving
19
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$303k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

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

Human Services$5.5MHealth$2.1MInternational$1.9MPhilanthropy$1.2MHousing & Shelter$1.2MEmployment$1.0MFood & Nutrition$435kPublic Safety & Disaster$297kOther$0
02FY2024 · 19 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $4k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $50k
  • $50k–250k14 grants · $1.7M
  • $250k+2 grants · $602k
$85,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$15M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
AKIN - CHILDHAVEN$303,186
GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND$298,425
FARESTART$202,132
HABITAT FOR HUMANITY$202,131
CRISTA$202,131
LEUKEMIA AND LYMPHOMA SOCIETY$151,593
HOPE FOR WARRIORS$141,485
MEDICAL TEAMS INTERNATIONAL$141,485
BLOODWORKS NW$101,077
TREEHOUSE$85,000
CASCADE MEDICAL TEAM FOUNDATION$80,000
NEUROVITALITY CENTER (STROKE)$80,000
MEDIC 1 FOUNDATION$75,000
NORTHWEST HARVEST$75,000
MAKE A WISH FOUNDATION$75,000
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 (FY17–24, $1.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND: $344k → 8%GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND: $340k → 8%GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND: $298k → 8%GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND: $180k → 8%GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND: $180k → 8%GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND: $180k → 8%GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND: $180k → 8%GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND: $180k → 8%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

AK
WA
MN
MA
OR
CA
KY
VA
NC
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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$13M · 23 repeat orgs$1.5M to everyone else

23 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

23
2

Total granted

$13M
$226k

Still filing today

65%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 46% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.2M 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
HealthInternationalHuman ServicesEmploymentPhilanthropyYouth DevelopmentOther
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

  • GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $1.9M · revenue +86%
  • C
    CHILDHAVEN
    7× · 2017–2023 · $1.6M · revenue +31%
  • SM
    SEATTLE MILK FUND INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $960k · revenue +79% · 71% of their budget

Funded once

  • TS
    TREEHOUSE SEATTLE
    one grant, 2023 · $115k
  • TM
    TREEHOUSE MINESOTA
    one grant, 2023 · $112k
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
The Humane Society for Seattleking County

Seattle humane promotes the human-animal bond by saving and serving pets in need, regardless of age, ability, circumstance or geography.

Animals
2
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health

Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…

Health
3
Disability Rights Washington

Disability rights washington's mission is to advance the dignity, equality, and self determination of people with disabilities. we work to pursue justice on matters related to human and legal rights.

Human Services
4
CRAFT3

To build a thriving, just and empowered pacific northwest using capital, relationships and voice.

Community Improvement
5
The Water Research Foundation

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…

Environment
6
Food & Water Watch

Food & water watch conducts extensive research and public education to ensure the food and water we consume is safe, accessible and sustainably produced. so we can all enjoy and trust in what we eat and drink, we help people take charge of…

Food & Nutrition
7
Seattle Biomedical Research Institute

We conduct fundamental infectious disease research to generate critical new knowledge about pathogens and their interactions with see schedule o for continuationhumans to enable the discovery and development of novel interventions,…

—
8
North Olympic Healthcare Network

To provide patient-centered, quality-driven, whole-person healthcare services, accessible to everyone in our community.

Health
9
Life Science Washington

Life science washington is a non-profit trade and professional association dedicated to promoting innovation and responsible growth in the life sciences and biomedical industries in the state of washington. promotion and education are…

—
10
Donor Network West

Donor network west is the federally designated organ procurement organization serving northern california and northern nevada. the service area includes nearly 14 million people across 100,000 square miles. approximately 110,000 people are…

—
11
Bio Ventures for Global Health

BVGH drives sustainable, market-informed solutions to improve access to quality healthcare in low- and middle-income countries. BVGH builds cross-sector partnerships that align industry, government, and local health-system priorities to…

Health
12
United Way of Snohomish County

United way of snohomish county improves lives for families in snohomish county by bringing people, resources, and strategy together.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Alaska & Washington; the most unlike its peers is Blood Cancer United Inc. 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

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 35 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
18/18
Grantees still filing
13/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

CHILDHAVEN: $1,584,056 · OtherCHILDHAVENWORLD CONCERN: $1,052,684 · OtherWORLD CONCERNSEATTLE MILK FUND INC: $960,000 · OtherSEATTLE MILK FUND INCHABITAT FOR HUMANITY SEATTLE-KING COUNTY: $951,292 · OtherHABITAT FOR HUMANITY SEATTLE-KING COUNTYLEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA: $531,059 · OtherLEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMANORTHWEST HARVEST EMM: $435,338 · OtherTHE CASCADE MEDICAL TEAM FOUNDATION: $350,000 · OtherMAKE-A-WISH OF ALASKA & WASHINGTON: $341,801 · OtherPUGET SOUND BLOOD CENTER: $341,801 · OtherAKIN - CHILDHAVEN: $303,186 · Other+14 more: $1,534,513 · Other+14 moreGUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND INC: $1,882,481 · Human ServicesGUIDE DOGS FOR …FARESTART: $1,004,092 · EmploymentHope For The Warriors: $833,274 · PhilanthropyMEDICAL TEAMS INTERNATIONAL: $798,155 · International+1 more: $20,000 · InternationalMEDIC ONE FOUNDATION: $296,801 · HealthTHE BRIAN GRANT FOUNDATION: $175,000 · HealthBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $151,593 · HealthBLOODWORKS: $101,077 · HealthMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF ALASKA & WASHINGTON: $75,000 · HealthTREEHOUSE: $455,000 · Youth Development
Other$8,385,730Human Services$1,882,481Employment$1,004,092Philanthropy$833,274International$818,155Health$799,471Youth Development$455,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetGUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND INC: $1,882,481 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetCHILDHAVEN: $1,584,056 over 7y, 2.6% of budgetFARESTART: $1,004,092 over 8y, 1.4% of budgetSEATTLE MILK FUND INC: $960,000 over 6y, 71% of budgetHABITAT FOR HUMANITY SEATTLE-KING COUNTY: $951,292 over 7y, 1.4% of budgetHope For The Warriors: $833,274 over 8y, 1.8% of budgetMEDICAL TEAMS INTERNATIONAL: $798,155 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetTREEHOUSE: $455,000 over 7y, 0.5% of budgetNORTHWEST HARVEST EMM: $435,338 over 8y, 0.2% of budgetMEDIC ONE FOUNDATION: $296,801 over 7y, 1.8% of budgetStroke Recovery Center dba Neuro Vitality Center: $220,000 over 6y, 13% of budgetTHE BRIAN GRANT FOUNDATION: $175,000 over 8y, 6.8% of budgetBLOOD CANCER UNITED INC: $151,593 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $120,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetBLOODWORKS: $101,077 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF ALASKA & WASHINGTON: $75,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetWave Foundation Inc: $55,000 over 6y, 2.0% of budgetEarthcorps: $20,000 over 4y, 0.2% 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.

  • Who funds GUIDE DOGS FOR THE BLIND INC ↗
  • Who funds CHILDHAVEN ↗
  • Who funds FARESTART ↗
  • Who funds SEATTLE MILK FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY SEATTLE-KING COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds Hope For The Warriors ↗
  • Who funds MEDICAL TEAMS INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds TREEHOUSE ↗
  • Who funds NORTHWEST HARVEST EMM ↗
  • Who funds MEDIC ONE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Stroke Recovery Center dba Neuro Vitality Center ↗
  • Who funds THE BRIAN GRANT FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BLOOD CANCER UNITED INC ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BLOODWORKS ↗
  • Who funds MAKE-A-WISH FOUNDATION OF ALASKA & WASHINGTON ↗
  • Who funds Wave Foundation Inc ↗
  • Who funds Earthcorps ↗

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.

Puget Sound Energy Fo…Seattle FoundationUnited Way of King Co…M J Murdock Charitabl…The Blackbaud Giving …Mightycause Charitabl…Baird Foundation IncMorgan Stanley Global…Gs Donor Advised Phil…American Online Givin…Vanguard Charitable E…Natl Christian Charit…
Puget Sound Energy FoundationDE17.5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Seattle Foundation · United Way of King County · M J Murdock Charitable Trust · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · Mightycause Charitable Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc

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 Roma Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Roma Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →median 19%
  • Medical Teams International: 19% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
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.

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 35 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 Roma’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