· Private foundation
The Gerald and Susan Schwalbach Family Foundation
Its FY2020 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 61% of The Gerald and Susan Schwalbach Family 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 · FY2020
- Under $10k2 grants · $10k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $55k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ST CECILIA CHURCH | $20,000 |
| LEAD-UP INTERNATIONAL | $20,000 |
| LEAD-UP INTERNATIONAL | $15,000 |
| FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN-PORTLAND | $5,000 |
| PROJECT LEMONADE INC | $5,000 |
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 (FY18–20, $70k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
8 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2020, 6 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (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 FY2020, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
CORPORATION OF GONZAGA UNIVERSITY2× · 2018–2019 · $20k · revenue +43%
LITTLE BIT THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER2× · 2018–2019 · $15k · revenue +28%- YAYoung America's Foundation2× · 2018–2019 · $15k · revenue +50%
Funded once
- CHCATHOLIC HOUSING SERVICES OF EASTERN WASHINGTONone grant, 2018 · $20k · revenue -77%
- MSMAKE SOME NOISE CURE KIDS CANCER NORTHWESTone grant, 2018 · $20k
- MFMARCH FOR LIFE EDUCATION & DEFENSE FUNDgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +32%
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 Pro-Choice Washington Foundation is our 501c3 focused on issue research, leadership development, and community and decision-maker education.
Empowering life-affirming decisions
As expressions of god's healing love, witnessed through the ministry of jesus, we are steadfast in serving all, especially those who are poor and vulnerable.
To protect and promote every persons right to access the full range of reproductive healthcare choices in Washington State, including safe and legal abortion, through education, advocacy, lobbying and coalition-building
To restore habitat, water quality and native species in the puget sound
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.…
Catholics for Choice - which serves the pro-choice Catholic majority - encounters, educates, and emboldens people of faith who support reproductive freedom. Catholics for Choice believes healthcare is a human right and that includes access…
To provide exceptional reproductive and complementary health care services, honest education, and advocacy for all.
Seattle humane promotes the human-animal bond by saving and serving pets in need, regardless of age, ability, circumstance or geography.
Catholic charities foundation is organized for the principal purpose of stimulating gifts from private sources and grants from the state or federal government for the sole and exclusive benefit of catholic charities.
To serve as the sole member of the various health care and supporting organizations that comprise st. mary's healthcare system for children
Defend the right to life of all citizens of our state, whether born or preborn, young, old, disabled, or terminally ill. we affirm that the right to life exists at the moment of fertilization and extends until natural death.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Catholic Community Services of Western Washington and the most unlike its peers is Lead-Up International. 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 45 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
23 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. 23 of the 30 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 LEAD-UP INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds CORPORATION OF GONZAGA UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC HOUSING SERVICES OF EASTERN WASHINGTON ↗
- Who funds LITTLE BIT THERAPEUTIC RIDING CENTER ↗
- Who funds Young America's Foundation ↗
- Who funds MARCH FOR LIFE EDUCATION & DEFENSE FUND ↗
- Who funds Opal Creek Ancient Forest Center ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds SWEDISH MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BAINBRIDGE ISLAND PARKS & TRAILS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICA'S VETDOGS THE VETERANS K-9 CORPS INC ↗
- Who funds MONTESSORI COUNTRY SCHOOLS ↗
- Who funds PREGNANCY RESOURCE SERVICES ↗
- Who funds PROJECT LEMONADE INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN-PORTLAND ↗
- Who funds COPPER CANNON CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICES OF WESTERN WASHINGTON ↗
- Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SPOKANE ↗
- Who funds NOKOTA HORSE CONSERVANCY INC ↗
- Who funds Susan B Anthony List Education Fund ↗
- Who funds Seattle Children's Foundation ↗
- Who funds DAMASCUS INC ↗
- Who funds 40 DAYS FOR LIFE ↗
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: The Cedar Spray Foundation · Seattle Foundation · The Oregon Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Baird Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · The Pfizer Foundation Inc · National Philanthropic Trust · American Endowment Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc
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 The Gerald and Susan Schwalbach Family 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.
- Project Lemonade Inc — 15% of income from government
- Friends of the Children-Portland — 5% of income from government
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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to The Gerald and Susan Schwalbach Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Gerald and Susan Schwalbach Family 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.