How much does The Bullitt Foundation give?

The Bullitt Foundation reported 56 grants totaling $2,441,654 in its FY2024 IRS filing. It funded between 125 and 157 organizations a year over FY2017 to FY2023.

What does The Bullitt Foundation fund?

By grant dollars over FY2017 to FY2024, its largest causes are Environment (64%), Education (7%), Community Improvement (5%).

Who are The Bullitt Foundation's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2017 to FY2024: Earth Day Network Inc ($3.1M), University of Washington Foundation ($1.6M), Washington Conservation Action Education Fund ($794k).

Does The Bullitt Foundation fund new organizations?

In FY2023, 31% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.

Does The Bullitt Foundation accept unsolicited applications?

Its most recent filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and does not take unsolicited requests. Check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

Which funders back the same organizations as The Bullitt Foundation?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Seattle Foundation, The Satterberg Foundation Inc, The Russell Family Foundation.

Where is The Bullitt Foundation based?

The Bullitt Foundation is based in WA.

The Bullitt Foundation

The Bullitt Foundation at a glance Also receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

The Bullitt Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$2.4M

Granted FY2024still arriving

Grants FY2024still arriving

States reached

$125k

Largest

01What it funds

0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Environment$27MEducation$2.8MCommunity Improvement$2.3MPhilanthropy$1.5MCivil Rights$1.1MRecreation & Sports$1.1MFood & Nutrition$912kHousing & Shelter$835kOther$0

02FY2024 · 56 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

Under $10k16 grants · $21k
$10k–50k14 grants · $494k
$50k–250k26 grants · $1.9M

$45,000

Median grant

States reached

$46M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
TOXIC-FREE FUTURE	$125,000
VERDE	$100,000
TRANSPORTATION CHOICES COALITION	$100,000
FUTUREWISE	$100,000
WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION	$100,000
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION	$100,000
OREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL	$95,000
SIGHTLINE INSTITUTE	$95,000
350 SEATTLE	$90,000
RENEWABLE NORTHWEST PROJECT	$80,000
BLUEGREEN ALLIANCE FOUNDATION	$80,000
CENTER FOR SUSTAINABLE INFRASTRUCTURE	$75,000
EARTHJUSTICE	$75,000
DUWAMISH RIVER CLEANUP COALITION	$70,000
WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION	$60,000

02The need

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 (FY17–24, $831k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 3% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

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

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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.

$35M · 212 repeat orgs$5.9M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +45% since the first grant, against +23% for those funded once.

212 repeat relationships: 43 still active in FY2024, 169 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

212

221

Total granted

$35M

$5.9M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+45%

+23%

Still filing today

78%

57%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $4k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

EnvironmentEducationArts & CultureHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementAnimalsOther

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

UO
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION
8× · 2017–2024 · $1.6M · revenue +46%
WC
WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND
6× · 2017–2022 · $794k · revenue +66%
NE
NW ENERGY COALITION
5× · 2017–2023 · $661k · revenue +56%

Funded once

RP
ROCKEFELLER PHILANTHROPHY ADVISORS
one grant, 2019 · $200k
GP
GLOBAL PHILANTHROPY PARTNERSHIP
one grant, 2017 · $150k · revenue -28%
WE
WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL (WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION)
one grant, 2022 · $130k

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.

Center for Environmental Law & Policy

The Center for Environmental Law & Policy is a statewide organization whose mission is to protect, preserve and restore Washington's waters through education, advocacy, policy reform, and public interest litigation.

Environment

Fsc I&P

Fsc i&p promotes environmentally appropriate, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world's forests. this mission aligns with the forest stewardship council (fsc), its network of offices, and other organizations.…

Philanthropy

Cascade Climate Inc

To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.

Environment

Washington Wild

Washington wild protects and restores wild lands and waters in washington state through advocacy, education and civic engagement.

Animals

Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council

The Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council is a local nonprofit organization that strives to enhance and restore habitat for fish and wildlife our community and for future generations. Our Board of Directors consists of seven members with…

Environment

Southeast Alaska Conservation Council Inc-Seacc

SEACC's mission is to protect the special places of the world's largest temperate rainforest, promote conservation, and advocate for sustainability in human use of natural resources. Inspired by the land, wildlife, cultures, and…

Environment

Whatcom Land Trust

The mission of the Whatcom Land Trust is to preserve and protect wildlife habitat, scenic, agricultural and open space lands in Whatcom County for future generations by securing interests in land and promoting land stewardship.

Environment

The Climate Center

The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.

Education

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

10000 Years Institute

10,000 Years Institute evaluates the ecological effects of human activities on natural environments, and promotes the maintenance and restoration of ecological integrity through the integration of reliable scientific information, sound…

Unclassified

Rogue Climate

Rogue Climate's mission is to empower Southern Oregon communities most impacted by climate change including low-income, rural, youth, seniors & communities of color, to win climate justice by organizing for clean energy, sustainable jobs &…

Education

Boulder Watershed Collective

The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…

Environment

How this is measured

The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Social and Environmental Entrepreneurs (See) Inc; the most unlike its peers is Somali Family Safety Task Force Somali Family Safety Task Force. 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

316 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. 316 of the 446 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

302/316

Grantees still filing

223/316

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Environment$18,655,456Other$12,921,558Education$2,342,344Community Improvement$1,839,750Philanthropy$1,340,675Arts & Culture$783,984Recreation & Sports$733,630

Showing the 200 largest grantees by grant value.

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

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.

Seattle FoundationWA95.6× affinity121 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seattle Foundation · The Satterberg Foundation Inc · The Russell Family Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · The Norcliffe Foundation · Stolte Family Foundation · Patagoniaorg · The Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment · Kaleidoscope Foundation · Social Justice Fund Northwest · Ridge Road Foundation · United States Energy 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 The Bullitt Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Bullitt Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

23get no government money at all

58report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)

3rely on government for over half their income

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 The Bullitt Foundation?

Find your warmest path to The Bullitt Foundation 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.

Play a game based on Bullitt’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