Skip to content

· Private foundation

The Carl and Gretchen Gould Family 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.

$50k
Granted FY2024still arriving
2
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$40k
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 2024.

Environment$159kEducation$120kPhilanthropy$30kCommunity Improvement$30kHealth$28kRecreation & Sports$8k
02FY2024 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$40,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
University of Washington Foundation$40,000
Planned Parenthood$10,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 87% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Third Sector New England: $30k → 16%Planned Parenthood: $10k → 9%Our Forest Fund (Kitsap Community Foundation): $40k → 10%Prince William Sound Science Center: $45k → 7%Best Beginnings: $34k → 10%Planned Parenthood: $7k → 9%Best Beginnings: $9k → 10%Planned Parenthood: $6k → 9%Best Beginnings: $7k → 10%Planned Parenthood: $5k → 9%Seattle Foundation: $30k → 9%Lake Washington Rowing Club: $8k → 9%University of Washington Foundation: $40k → 9%Forterra: $32k → 9%Forterra: $30k → 9%Forterra: $13k → 9%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.
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 13% of The Carl and Gretchen Gould Family Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 59% of the giving stays in WA; by stated purpose, 32%.

The Carl and Gretchen Gould Family Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 27% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

53%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$181k · 4 repeat orgs$163k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +22% since the first grant, against +14% for those funded once.

4 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2024, 3 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

4
4

Total granted

$181k
$123k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+22%
+14%

Still filing today

50%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 20% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $40k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentPhilanthropyEducationCommunity ImprovementRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • FN
    FORTERRA NW
    3× · 2017–2022 · $74k · revenue -6%
  • BB
    BEST BEGINNINGS
    3× · 2017–2021 · $49k · revenue +22%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    5× · 2017–2022 · $31k

Funded once

  • PW
    Prince William Sound Science & Technology Institute
    one grant, 2023 · $45k · revenue -30%
  • OF
    Our Forest Fund (Kitsap Community Foundation)
    one grant, 2022 · $40k
  • THIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC
    one grant, 2021 · $30k · revenue +14%
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
05the grantee network

7 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. 7 of the 10 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)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Prince William Sound Science & Technology Institute: $45,000 · OtherPrince William Sound Science & Technology I…Our Forest Fund (Kitsap Community Foundation): $40,000 · OtherOur Forest Fund (Kitsap Community Foundatio…Individual grant recipient: $30,500 · OtherIndividual grant recipientPlanned Parenthood: $27,700 · OtherPlanned ParenthoodBEST BEGINNINGS: $49,000 · PhilanthropyBEST BEGINNINGSSEATTLE FOUNDATION: $30,000 · PhilanthropySEATTLE FOUNDATIONFORTERRA NW: $74,000 · EnvironmentFORTERRA NWUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $40,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY O…THIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC: $30,000 · Community ImprovementTHIRD SEC…Lake Washington Rowing Club: $7,500 · Recreation & Sports
Other$143,200Philanthropy$79,000Environment$74,000Education$40,000Community Improvement$30,000Recreation & Sports$7,500

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 budgetFORTERRA NW: $74,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetBEST BEGINNINGS: $49,000 over 3y, 6.0% of budgetPrince William Sound Science & Technology Institute: $45,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHIRD SECTOR NEW ENGLAND INC: $30,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSEATTLE FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLake Washington Rowing Club: $7,500 over 1y, 1.5% 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.

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA3.3× affinity4 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Amazonsmile 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 Carl and Gretchen Gould Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Carl and Gretchen Gould Family Foundation. 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%15%30%45%60%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Third Sector New England Inc: 3% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–60%
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 10 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Carl and Gretchen Gould Family’s filings →

More from the funding graph