· Public charity
Rotary International District 5030
Rotary is a Worldwide Service Organization.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 9 grants below total $73,350 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $131,600 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $58,250 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k8 grants · $57k
- $10k–50k1 grant · $16k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Lynnwood Rotary Community Foundation | $16,000 |
| Bellevue Breakfast Rotary Club Foundation | $8,000 |
| Lake Forest Park Rotary Charitable Foundation | $8,000 |
| University Rotary Service Fund | $8,000 |
| University Sunrise Rotary Service Foundation | $8,000 |
| Foundation of The Rotary Club of Mercer Island | $8,000 |
| Seattle Rotary Service Foundation | $6,000 |
| Rotary Club of the Pacific Northwest - Ending Sex Trafficking | $5,850 |
| Seattle Rotary Service Foundation | $5,500 |
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 (FY20–25, $83k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 26% of Rotary International District 5030’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 89% of the giving stays in WA; read by stated purpose it is 52% — less of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.
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 foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +40% since the first grant, against +21% for the ones you funded once.
13 repeat relationships — 6 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 1 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, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $6k 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
- URUniversity Rotary Service Fund5× · 2020–2025 · $50k · revenue +84%
- LFLake Forest Park Rotary Charitable Found5× · 2020–2025 · $47k · revenue +43%
- LULAKE UNION ROTARY FOUNDATION3× · 2020–2022 · $25k · revenue +62%
Funded once
- MCMILL CREEK ROTARY FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $15k · revenue +132% · 28% of their budget
- RFRCKD FOUNDATIONone grant, 2020 · $12k
- BBBELLEVUE BREAKFAST ROTARYone grant, 2023 · $10k
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.
Service and funding to various organizations throughout our community and worldwide.
Assist education of youth and help children and communities internationally
Service organization
Community service
To transform gifts into service projects that change lives both close to home and around the world.
Provide grants to nonprofits in the local community and scholarships for local students.
Net proceeds from fundraisers used to support educational, civic and humanitarian projects world wide.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bellevue Rotary Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Lake Union Rotary Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
28 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. 28 of the 36 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 THE ROTARY FOUNDATION OF ROTARY INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds University Rotary Service Fund ↗
- Who funds Lake Forest Park Rotary Charitable Found ↗
- Who funds Ballard Rotary Foundation ↗
- Who funds SEATTLE ROTARY SERVICE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION OF THE ROTARY CLUB OF MERCER ISLAND ↗
- Who funds BELLEVUE BREAKFAST ROTARY CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Rotary Club of Emerald City Foundation ↗
- Who funds LAKE UNION ROTARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Bellevue Sunrise Rotary Foundation ↗
- Who funds Lynnwood Rotary Community Foundation ↗
- Who funds EDMONDS DAYBREAKERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds University Sunrise Rotary Service Founda ↗
- Who funds FOUNDATION OF ROTARY CLUB OF ISSAQUAH ↗
- Who funds MILL CREEK ROTARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Kirkland Rotary Foundation ↗
- Who funds SHORELINE ROTARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ROTARY CLUB OF KENT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Maple Valley Rotary Foundation ↗
- Who funds ROTARY CLUB CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BELLEVUE ROTARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds WOODINVILLE ROTARY CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SEATTLE-INTERNATIONAL DISTRICT ROTARY CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RENTON ROTARY CAPER INC ↗
- Who funds FEDERAL WAY ROTARY SERVICE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds DES MOINES NORMANDY PARK ROTARY ↗
- Who funds Rotary Club of Covington Foundation ↗
- Who funds REDMOND ROTARY CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
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: The Rotary Foundation of Rotary International · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Amazonsmile Foundation · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund
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 Rotary International District 5030 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.
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.