Skip to content
Rotary International District 5080 at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Rotary International District 5080

To advance the mission of Rotary International.

$83k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
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 2025.

Public Safety & Disaster$65kEducation$60kYouth Development$36kFood & Nutrition$23kHealth$21kEnvironment$20kEmployment$19kCommunity Improvement$17kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $32,060, the rows itemized in this filing. The $82,862 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $50,802 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$7,439
Median grant
2
States reached
$391k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Newport-Priest River Rotary club$10,000
Columbia Valley Daybreak Rotary Club$7,439
Spokane Rotary Club$7,439
Post Falls Rotary Club$7,182
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 (FY22–22, $16k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, 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%SHELTER BOX USA: $16k → 14%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.

Grants abroad, by region: $44k on the FY2025 return

Schedule F, as filed: 3 regions. The IRS asks for region and purpose, not the recipient, so no country or grantee can be named here.

Sub-Saharan Africa$16k · 36% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: Equipemnt for school in Kenya · Provide funds for food and vital supplies while town was under rebel attack

North America (Canada and Mexico)$15k · 34% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: Equipment for school in Mexico · Medical training and supplies for residents of mexico

Central America and the Caribbean$13k · 30% · 2 grants

Stated purpose: Equipment for school in Honduras

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. Grants abroad on Schedule F are filed by region, purpose and amount with no recipient name, so they are shown by region and cannot be placed on the country map or matched to a grantee.
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 15% of Rotary International District 5080’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 61% of the giving stays in WA; by stated purpose, 26%.

Rotary International District 5080lessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 48% 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.

76%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$236k · 7 repeat orgs$76k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +88% since the first grant, against +3% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
9

Total granted

$236k
$51k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+88%
+3%

Still filing today

100%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 23% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
Human ServicesCommunity 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

  • RC
    Rotary Club of Sandpoint
    7× · 2017–2023 · $68k · revenue +88%
  • RC
    ROTARY CLUB OF COLUMBIA CENTER
    4× · 2018–2023 · $37k · revenue ×27
  • RI
    Rotary International Spokane Valley Sunrise
    6× · 2017–2023 · $37k · revenue +100%

Funded once

  • RC
    ROTARY CLUB COEUR DALENE SUNRISE
    one grant, 2017 · $9k · revenue +14%
  • RI
    Rotary International Walla Walla Sunrise Rotary Club
    one grant, 2017 · $6k · revenue +8%
  • RC
    ROTARY CLUB OF COLVILLE WASHINGTON USA
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
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 Rotary Club of Snoqualmie Valley

Service and funding to various organizations throughout our community and worldwide.

Human Services
2
Rotary International

Service club

—
3
Rotary International

to provide community as well as worlwide assistance to those in need.

—
4
Rotary International Menomonie Rotary

A fellowship of individuals who are focused on supporting their community and building bridges between nations.

—
5
Rotary Foundation of the South Puget Sound Rotary Club
Education
6
Rotary International

Rotary is an organization of business and professional leaders united worldwide who provide humanitarian service, encourage high ethical standards in all vocations, and help build goodwill and peace in the world. The main objective of…

—
7
Lake Chelan Rotary Club

To support community and international goodwill and cooperation through Rotary.

—
8
Rotary International Sunrise Club

Humanitarian Service

—
9
Rotary Club of Pullman

We provide service to others, promote integrity, and advance world understanding, goodwill, and peace through our fellowship of business, professional, and community leaders.

Philanthropy
10
Rotary Club of Wenatchee Wa Usa Inc

Is to bring together business and professional leaders to provide humanitarian service, encourage high ethical standards in all vocations, and help build goodwill and peace in the world.

—
11
Rotary International

Community service above self, the club and its memembers raise funds to give back to the local and international community. We support world wide polio eradication, locally provide fuel assistance to the elderly, support the local schools…

—
12
Rotary International Rotary Club of Watertown Wi

Community service

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Coeur D'alene Rotary Club Inc; the most unlike its peers is Shelterbox Usa Inc. 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

15 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. 15 of the 19 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/15
Grantees still filing
7/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Rotary Club of Sandpoint: $67,876 · OtherRotary Club of SandpointRotary Club of Spokane: $48,705 · OtherRotary Club of SpokaneROTARY CLUB OF COLUMBIA CENTER: $37,263 · OtherROTARY CLUB OF COLUMBIA CENTERRotary International Spokane Valley Sunrise: $37,240 · OtherRotary International Spokane Valley SunrisePASCO KENNEWICK ROTARY CLUB: $13,000 · OtherROTARY CLUB OF SPOKANE AURORA NORTHWEST: $10,300 · OtherROTARY CLUB COEUR DALENE SUNRISE: $9,482 · Other+10 more: $56,167 · Other+10 moreSHELTERBOX USA INC: $21,601 · Human ServicesNEWPORT WA-PRIEST RIVER ID ROTARY CLUB INC: $10,000 · Community Improvement
Other$280,033Human Services$21,601Community Improvement$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetRotary Club of Sandpoint: $67,876 over 7y, 12% of budgetRotary Club of Spokane: $48,705 over 3y, 34% of budgetROTARY CLUB OF COLUMBIA CENTER: $37,263 over 4y, 2.7% of budgetRotary International Spokane Valley Sunrise: $37,240 over 6y, 18% of budgetSHELTERBOX USA INC: $21,601 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPASCO KENNEWICK ROTARY CLUB: $13,000 over 2y, 36% of budgetROTARY CLUB OF SPOKANE AURORA NORTHWEST: $10,300 over 2y, 12% of budgetROTARY CLUB COEUR DALENE SUNRISE: $9,482 over 1y, 13% of budgetColumbia Valley Daybreak Rotary: $7,439 over 1y, 9.7% of budgetRotary International Walla Walla Sunrise Rotary Club: $6,000 over 1y, 9.9% of budgetCOEUR D'ALENE ROTARY CLUB INC: $5,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetRotary Club of Walla Walla: $5,000 over 1y, 1.9% 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.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Rotary International District 5080 funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Rotary International District 5080. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    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 19 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Rotary International District 5080’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