Loading…
· Public charity
SECOND HARVEST INLAND NORTHWEST
Providing food to needy families in the community.
$142M
Granted FY2024
3
Grants
1
Communities
$100k
Largest
01What you fund
01beneath the categories
Past the labels — and the year it shifted
Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.
…and in their own words, year by year
2024
—
2025
children
Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.
02FY2024 · 3 grants
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $25k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
$15,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$28M
Total assets
Largest grants
- PARTNERS INLAND NORTHWEST$100,000
- OPPORTUNITIES INDUSTRIALIZATION CENTER$15,000
- RURAL RESOURCES COMMUNITY ACTION$10,000
02The need
03
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.
show:
Your human-services grants (FY24–24, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15% — the area typically sits at 12%. 100% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
03Your field
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.
1
Snohomish Community Food Bank
To provide food and services in a caring and dignified manner to neighbors in need
—
2
Nourish Pierce County
To provide food to individuals in need with compassion, dignity and respect. No one needing assistance is turned away.
—
3
Snoqualmie Valley Food Bank
We are dedicated to providing food assistance to low income individuals to help our neighbors and community thrive.
Food & Nutrition
4
Camas Prairie Food Bank Inc
Camas Prairie Food Bank Inc collects food and cash donations to purchase food which it then distributes to directly to the local population. The distribution center is open 2 days per week from 10AM to 2PM for those in need to stop by and…
Food & Nutrition
5
Clackamas Service Center
Clackamas service center is an inclusive, "one-stop" community center for individuals and families seeking food relief and resources for improved health, dignity, and stability.
Human Services
6
F I S H of Orchards Inc
FISH of Orchards, Inc. is an emergency food and clothing bank located in east Clark County, WA.
Food & Nutrition
7
Community Crisis Services and Food Bank
Our vision: every individual in our community has support in a time of need.
Human Services
8
Lynnwood Food Bank
Distribute food to those in need in the greater Lynnwood area.
Food & Nutrition
9
Columbia Falls Food Bank
Provide food to local needy
Food & Nutrition
10
Estacada Area Food Bank
To provide food for local community families.
Human Services
11
Columbia Pacific Food Bank
Columbia pacific food bank is the regional food distribution center for columbia county, oregon and local food pantry for the community of saint helens.
Food & Nutrition
12
McKenzie County Food Pantry
The McKenzie County Food Pantry provides food to those in need.
Food & Nutrition
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Partners Inland Northwest and the most unlike its peers is New Hope Ranch. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 34 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 7% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
Closures · last 5 years
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.
orgs you fund
2%5/252
the rest of the field
10%
749/7,429
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
04the grantee network
110 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2024.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.
0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
46
Early backer (in before they grew)
103/110
Grantees still filing
82/110
Grew since you first funded
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Human Services$125,000
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.
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.
Northwest Harvest EmmWA167.9× affinity96 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →
Open a dossier: Northwest Harvest Emm · Project Beauty Share · The Avista Foundation · Innovia Foundation · Better Health Together · Numerica Credit Union · Community Services of Moses Lake · Rural Resources Community Action · Providence Health & Services - · Inatai Foundation · United Way of Spokane County · Harvest Against Hunger
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 organisation SECOND HARVEST INLAND NORTHWEST 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.
2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
typical government reliance, FY20–24
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. 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.
04Through Plinth
Through Plinth
Your grantmaking, live and operational
This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: SPOKANE VALLEY PARTNERS.
Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk
Financial management
high risk
~1 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.
Track record & reputation
low risk
8 years of Form 990 filings, still active; revenue up 2.8× since.
Legal standing
low risk
US 501(c)(3); EIN 911478830 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.
Governance
Live in Plinth
Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.
Compliance & sanctions
Live in Plinth
OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.
Program capacity
Live in Plinth
Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.
Live · Plinth’s real DD engine
Run the actual assessment on SPOKANE VALLEY PARTNERS, cold from public data.
Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.
Post-award monitoring · continuous checks
- FlagFinancial stability— Roughly 1 months of cash on hand.
- On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
- On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 1% of their budget — diversified.
- Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.
What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.
Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing
Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro
How do I get to Second Harvest Inland Northwest?
Find your warmest path to Second Harvest Inland Northwest through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.
Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.
More from the funding graph
The regranting layer
51% of grant dollars pass through an intermediary
The DAF merry-go-round
$9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
Strange bedfellows
the named clusters of US funding
The camps
funders cluster by geography, not ideology
By state
where grant money is based, and what stays home
State money flows
the interactive map of money crossing state lines