Skip to content
Save Our Wild Salmon at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Save Our Wild Salmon

To protect and restore abundant, self-sustaining, harvestable populations of salmon and steelhead to the columbia and snake river basin and the marine waters of the pacific northwest for the benefit of people, wildlife and ecosystems.

$52k
Granted FY2023
2
Grants FY2023
2
States reached
$38k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2023.

Environment$156kRecreation & Sports$91kAnimals$37kCommunity Improvement$32kHuman Services$15kArts & Culture$10kYouth Development$9k
02FY2023 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 2 grants below total $47,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $52,350 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $4,850 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 · FY2023

  • Under $10k1 grant · $10k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $38k
$38,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$435k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NORTHWEST SPORTFISHING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION$38,000
CHILDREN OF THE SETTING SUN$9,500
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 (FY21–21, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, 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%BACKBONE CAMPAIGN: $15k → 9%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.
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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$307k · 7 repeat orgs$41k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2023, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
3

Total granted

$307k
$32k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+67%

Still filing today

100%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 80% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23
EnvironmentAnimalsCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • NP
    NIMIIPUU PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT
    4× · 2019–2022 · $67k · revenue +275%
  • NW
    NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION
    4× · 2019–2022 · $37k · revenue +66%
  • US
    UPPER SNAKE RIVER TRIBES FOUNDATION
    2× · 2021–2022 · $32k · revenue +43%

Funded once

  • BC
    Backbone Campaigngraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $15k · revenue +67%
  • CT
    CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION
    one grant, 2022 · $9k
  • SC
    SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue -73%
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
Wild Salmon Rivers

To conserve functioning salmon/steelhead eco-system at watershed levels, integrate angling activities with basic scientific research, collect raw data, monitor environmental functions, salmon/steelhead population dynamics, public…

Environment
2
Northwest Environmental Advocates

Work through advocacy and education to use federal environmental laws such as the Clean Water Act to protect and restore water quality and habit in the Pacific Northwest and nationwide.

Environment
3
Idaho Wildlife Federation

The Idaho Wildlife Federation (IWF) promotes the conservation of Idaho's wildlife heritage and legacy of sporting opportunities for the current and future generations.

Animals
4
California Sportfishing Protection Allia
Environment
5
Oregon Websites and Watershed Project Inc

Develop educational network to communicate historical and scientific information empasizing natural and cultural resources to pacific northwest.

Environment
6
Washington Coast Sustainable Salmon Foundation

The foundation board is comprised of members with diverse backgrounds and expertise who devote their shared commitment and passion to collectively support protection and restoration of the washington coast region salmon by providing…

Animals
7
Upper Colorado River Alliance
Environment
8
Trout Unlimited Inc

To conserve, protect, and restore north america's coldwater fisheries and their watersheds.

Animals
9
Resource Renewal Institute

The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.

Environment
10
North Dakota Natural Resources Trust
—
11
Idaho Forest Restoration Partnership
Environment
12
Braided River

We inspire people to protect wild places through images and stories that change perspectives, western north america's public lands are under threat. using the power of beautiful images, we publish photography books and create multimedia…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sierra Club Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Northwest Sportfishing Industry Association. 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

10 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. 10 of the 11 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NORTHWEST SPORTFISHING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION: $90,500 · OtherNORTHWEST SPORTFISHING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONNW ENERGY COALITION: $27,500 · OtherNW ENERGY COALITIONASSOCIATION OF NORTHWEST STEELHEADERS: $26,000 · OtherASSOCIATION OF NORTHWEST STEELHEADERSCONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERVATION: $8,500 · OtherCONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE UMATILLA INDIAN RESERV…NIMIIPUU PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT: $67,000 · EnvironmentNIMIIPUU PROTECTING THE ENVIRONME…PACIFIC RIVERS: $27,500 · EnvironmentPACIFIC RIVERSSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $8,000 · EnvironmentSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATIONNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $36,500 · AnimalsNATIONAL WI…UPPER SNAKE RIVER TRIBES FOUNDATION: $32,000 · Community ImprovementUPPER SNAK…Backbone Campaign: $15,000 · Human ServicesCHILDREN OF THE SETTING SUN PRODUCT: $9,500 · Philanthropy
Other$152,500Environment$102,500Animals$36,500Community Improvement$32,000Human Services$15,000Philanthropy$9,500

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 budgetNORTHWEST SPORTFISHING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION: $90,500 over 5y, 19% of budgetNIMIIPUU PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT: $67,000 over 4y, 19% of budgetNATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION: $36,500 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetUPPER SNAKE RIVER TRIBES FOUNDATION: $32,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetPACIFIC RIVERS: $27,500 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetNW ENERGY COALITION: $27,500 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetASSOCIATION OF NORTHWEST STEELHEADERS: $26,000 over 3y, 5.2% of budgetBackbone Campaign: $15,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetCHILDREN OF THE SETTING SUN PRODUCT: $9,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $8,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

Water FoundationMeyer Memorial TrustThe Oregon Community …Donor Advised Charita…Amazonsmile Foundation
Water FoundationCA17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Water Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · The Oregon Community Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Amazonsmile 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 Save Our Wild Salmon funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Save Our Wild Salmon. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 1%
  • Association of Northwest Steelheaders: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 Save Our Wild Salmon?

Find your warmest path to Save Our Wild Salmon 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 11 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Save Our Wild Salmon’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