· Private foundation
Smith-Barbieri Progressive Fund a Charitable Foundation
Help ensure those in need have every opportunity to succeed by reducing poverty, broadening affordable housing, fostering a more dynamic and powerful constituency and spotlighting our region.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 70% of SMITH-BARBIERI PROGRESSIVE FUND A CHARITABLE FOUNDATION’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k26 grants · $168k
- $10k–50k21 grants · $265k
- $50k–250k3 grants · $179k
- $250k+1 grant · $408k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $407,799 |
| MAUI GRASSROOTS COLLECTIVE | $75,510 |
| COMPASSIONATE ADDICTION TREATMENT | $53,255 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
| MUJERES IN ACTION | $25,000 |
| HILLYARD BUILT | $20,000 |
| NORTHEAST YOUTH & FAMILY SERVICES | $18,000 |
| OUR PLACE | $15,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $15,000 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SPOKANE | $15,000 |
| TEAM CHILD | $15,000 |
| JEWELS HELPING HANDS | $11,239 |
| LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF THE SPOKANE AREA | $10,293 |
| TRANSITIONS | $10,200 |
| NUESTRAS RACIES CENTRO | $10,109 |
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 (FY17–24, $655k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 99% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
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 +55% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
80 repeat relationships — 28 still active in FY2024, 52 since wound down; 23 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $265k 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
- CACompassionate Addiction Treatment6× · 2019–2024 · $311k · revenue +450%
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER WASHINGTON AND NORTH IDAHO3× · 2018–2020 · $305k · revenue +60%- TTransitions7× · 2018–2024 · $116k · revenue +29%
Funded once
- SFSpokane Food Fightersone grant, 2020 · $146k
- SRSpokesman Reviewone grant, 2022 · $62k
- GBGIVING BACK SPOKANEgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $43k · revenue +39%
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.
The Spokane River Forums mission is to create materials, events and activities that promote regional dialogues for sustaining a healthy river system while meeting the needs of a growing population.
we're an arts non profit that serves underserved artists through our residency program
The mission of Visit Spokane is to help promote economic development for Spokane County through tourism and tourism promotion.
Greater Spokane Action (GSA) is the political arm of Greater Spokane Progress (GSP), reshaping politics by educating, advocating and mobilizing to establish and strengthen equitable and progressive policies in our community.
Spokane Helpers Network assist low-income individuals and families by providing information on local resources for necessities such as, food, clothing, hygiene items, household goods, transportation. When no local resources can be found,…
Sage Indigenous Law Center's mission is to provide culturally grounded civil legal aid that protects the rights of Native American parents, children, and communities, while advancing justice and addressing systemic inequities.
To help families with children in our community who are situationally homeless achieve sustainable independence through a community based response by providing temporary housing, usually 60-90 days, along with case management.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Action Center and the most unlike its peers is Sole Aim. 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.
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 16 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 21% of your grantees by number, and just 12% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 11% of the field you don’t fund.
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.
90 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. 90 of the 198 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 Compassionate Addiction Treatment ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER WASHINGTON AND NORTH IDAHO ↗
- Who funds Transitions ↗
- Who funds GREATER SPOKANE LOW INCOME HOUSING ↗
- Who funds MIA MUJERES IN ACTION ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL NEIGHBORHOOD ↗
- Who funds MAUI GRASSROOT COLLECTIVE INC ↗
- Who funds Spark Central ↗
- Who funds Spokane Alliance ↗
- Who funds JEWELS HELPING HANDS ↗
- Who funds Carl Maxey Center ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds Boys & Girls Club of Spokane County ↗
- Who funds GIVING BACK SPOKANE ↗
- Who funds HEALTH AND JUSTICE RECOVERY ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds TREEHOUSE ↗
- Who funds PAGE AHEAD CHILDRENS LITERACY PRGM ↗
- Who funds TeamChild ↗
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: Innovia Foundation · The Avista Foundation · Better Health Together · Women Helping Women Fund · Empire Health Community Advocacy Fund · Inatai Foundation · Empire Health Foundation · Project Beauty Share · Community Building Foundation · School's Out Washington · Multicare Health System · Northwest Harvest Emm
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 Smith-Barbieri Progressive Fund a Charitable Foundation 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.