Skip to content

· Private foundation

Susan T Parkinson Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$34k
Granted FY2025still arriving
7
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$20k
Largest
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.

Health$184kEnvironment$22kFood & Nutrition$16kArts & Culture$9kYouth Development$7kReligion$1k
02FY2025 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $14k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $20k
$1,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$295k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SPASTIC PARAPLEGIA FOUNDATION INC$20,000
ADVOCATES FOR THE WEST$5,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION$5,000
IDAHO FOOD BANK$1,000
JESSE TREE$1,000
BOISE STATE PUBLIC RADIO$1,000
IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE$1,000
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 (FY17–22, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, 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%IDAHO YOUTH RANCH: $2k → 8%IDAHO YOUTH RANCH: $1k → 8%IDAHO YOUTH RANCH: $1k → 8%IDAHO YOUTH RANCH: $1k → 8%IDAHO YOUTH RANCH: $1k → 8%IDAHO YOUTH RANCH: $1k → 8%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.

Which US states its grants reach

ID
MN
MI
NY
CA
MO
DC
TX
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.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$225k · 13 repeat orgs$13k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
5

Total granted

$225k
$5k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+1%
+61%

Still filing today

54%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 76% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EnvironmentFood & NutritionHealthHuman 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

  • SP
    SPASTIC PARAPLEGIA FOUNDATION INC
    2× · 2024–2025 · $35k · revenue +1%
  • IF
    IDAHO FOODBANK WAREHOUSE
    9× · 2017–2025 · $14k · revenue +48%
  • IY
    IDAHO YOUTH RANCH INC
    6× · 2017–2022 · $7k · revenue +140%

Funded once

  • SC
    SILVER CREEK ALLIANCE INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $2k · revenue +61%
  • SC
    SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue -67%
  • SMILE TRAIN INC
    one grant, 2023 · $1k · revenue +22%
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
Idaho Forest Restoration Partnership
Environment
2
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
3
Ecosystem Sciences Foundation Inc

River and watershed restoration

Environment
4
Washington Water Trust

Wwt's mission is to protect and restore water in rivers and streams across washington state. washington water trust restores and protects water in rivers and streams and promotes sustainable freshwater management in washington, and, more…

Environment
5
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
6
Project Big Wood a Nonprofit Corporation

Project big wood is organized to improve the environmental health and ecology of the big wood river basin in central idaho by protecting, enhancing, sustaining and reconnecting the big wood river, its tributaries and its watershed.

Environment
7
Swan Valley Connections

Maintain the swan valley's unique natural resources and ensure that a vibrant human community can sustain itself through stewardship, education, economic viability, and conservation on public and private lands.

Environment
8
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
9
Big Thompson Watershed Coalition

Vision: a healthy and resilient big thompson watershed benefitting fish, wildlife, and the people itserves through collaborative efforts for current and future generations. mission: working with others to take action that protects and…

Environment
10
Powder River Basin Resource Council

- the preservation and enrichment of wyoming's agricultural heritage and rural lifestyle. - the conservation of wyoming's unique land, mineral, water, and clean air resources consistent with responsible use of those resources to sustain…

Environment
11
West Creek Conservancy

Our mission is to enrich the lives of all people in northeast ohio by conserving natural habitats, restoring the ecological value of our region's lands and waters, and expanding opportunities to connect people from all cultures to…

Environment
12
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Sierra Club Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Spastic Paraplegia Foundation Inc. 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

13 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. 13 of the 22 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
7/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SPASTIC PARAPLEGIA FOUNDATION INC: $85,000 · OtherSPASTIC PARAPLEGIA FOUNDATION INCUNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN HEREDITARY SPASTIC PARAPLEGIA FUND: $40,000 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN HEREDITARY SPASTIC PARAPLEGIA FUNDPLANNED PARENTHOOD: $14,500 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD+10 more: $22,100 · Other+10 moreSPASTIC PARAPLEGIA FOUNDATION INC: $35,000 · HealthSPASTIC PARAPLEGIA …PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $5,000 · HealthPLANNED PARENTHOOD …IDAHO FOODBANK WAREHOUSE: $13,500 · Food & NutritionBLAINE COUNTY HUNGER COALITION INC: $2,500 · Food & NutritionADVOCATES FOR THE WEST INC: $10,000 · EnvironmentSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $1,500 · EnvironmentWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO: $500 · EnvironmentIDAHO YOUTH RANCH INC: $6,500 · Human ServicesSILVER CREEK ALLIANCE INC: $1,500 · Philanthropy
Other$161,600Health$40,000Food & Nutrition$16,000Environment$12,000Human Services$6,500Philanthropy$1,500

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 budgetSPASTIC PARAPLEGIA FOUNDATION INC: $35,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetIDAHO FOODBANK WAREHOUSE: $13,500 over 9y, 0.0% of budgetADVOCATES FOR THE WEST INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetIDAHO YOUTH RANCH INC: $6,500 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetPLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSIERRA CLUB: $3,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE CENTER: $3,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetBLAINE COUNTY HUNGER COALITION INC: $2,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSILVER CREEK ALLIANCE INC: $1,500 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetSIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSMILE TRAIN INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO: $500 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.

  • Who funds SPASTIC PARAPLEGIA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds IDAHO FOODBANK WAREHOUSE ↗
  • Who funds ADVOCATES FOR THE WEST INC ↗
  • Who funds IDAHO YOUTH RANCH INC ↗
  • Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
  • Who funds SIERRA CLUB ↗
  • Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds BLAINE COUNTY HUNGER COALITION INC ↗
  • Who funds SILVER CREEK ALLIANCE INC ↗
  • Who funds SIERRA CLUB FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SMILE TRAIN INC ↗
  • Who funds IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC ↗
  • Who funds WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO ↗

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.

Vanguard Charitable Endowment ProgramPA10× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Susan T Parkinson Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Susan T Parkinson Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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 22 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-PF 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 Susan T Parkinson’s filings →

    More from the funding graph