Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Sumner Community Food Bank

Charitable and education

$2.1M
Granted FY2020
2
Grants FY2020
1
States reached
$2k
Largest
01What you fund
01FY2020 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 2 grants below total $2,380 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $2,119,128 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $2,116,748 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.

$2,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Open Life Church$2,000
Sumner Bonney Lake School District$380
02The need
02

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:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY20–20) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%Sumner Bonney Lake School District: $380 → 9%Open Life Church: $2k → 9%0%20%40%50%more need →
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 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.

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
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
2
Snohomish Community Food Bank

To provide food and services in a caring and dignified manner to neighbors in need

3
Seattle Indian Center
Human Services
4
Eat Happy Now

Eat Happy's mission revolves around rescuing perfectly healthy food that would otherwise be discarded and ending up in landfills.

Food & Nutrition
5
New Hope Ranch
6
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
7
Bread of Refuge Inc

Bread of Refuge is a food pantry that distributes over 1600 banana boxes of food every month to families in need. We also feed 75-to-100 homeless people every week.

Human Services
8
Nourish Pierce County

To provide food to individuals in need with compassion, dignity and respect. No one needing assistance is turned away.

9
Westside Interfaith Network

Provide basic goods and services for unsheltered and poor

10
Nooksack Valley Food Bank Association

Our mission is to provide a variety of food products to families and individuals who are in need. We are open one day a week.

Food & Nutrition
11
Cumby Food Pantry

food pantry

Food & Nutrition
12
Turning Point Community Services Center Inc

Provide food for those in need living in the clatskanie oregon area.

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwest Harvest Emm and the most unlike its peers is One in the Spirit Ministries. 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.

← shrinkinggrowing →↓ leaning in → pulling backsteadyFood Banks and Hunger ReliefImmigrant & Refugee ServicesAnimal Rescue and AdoptionYouth Mentoring & SupportInternational Christian Out…Local History Museums & Her…Housing & Supportive Servic…Faith-Based Healthcare & So…
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
Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

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 29 years old; the field is 15. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number23%16%<5yr15%10%5–10yr19%10%10–20yr19%24%20–35yr13%20%35–55yr12%20%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value23%0%<5yr15%0%5–10yr19%0%10–20yr19%0%20–35yr13%0%35–55yr12%100%55yr+

The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 16% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close 3% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
3%2/60
the rest of the field
14%
2,243/16,503

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.

03the grantee network

32 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2020–2025.

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 20202025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
29/32
Grantees still filing
15/32
Grew since you first funded

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ your share of their budget
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.

Korum for Kids FoundationWA32× affinity13 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Korum for Kids Foundation · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Greater Tacoma Community Foundation · Northwest Harvest Emm · Food Lifeline · Gary E Milgard Family Foundation- Sunshine · The Wm M & a Cafaro Family Foundation · Rotary International Sumner Rotary Club · Emergency Food Network of Tacoma and Pierce County · Woodworth Family Foundation · Multicare Health System · Names Family Foundation

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 2 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $8.9M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2020, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph