· Private foundation
The Hazel Fund
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k12 grants · $12k
- $10k–50k4 grants · $85k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| RAINIER ATHLETES | $30,000 |
| HERITAGE UNIVERSITY | $25,000 |
| MISSISSIPPI CENTER FOR JUSTICE | $15,000 |
| ALLIANCE FOR JUSTICE | $15,000 |
| HABITAT FOR HUMANITY | $2,000 |
| UKC BASKETBALL CLUB | $1,500 |
| ACLU | $1,200 |
| CHILD AID | $1,000 |
| CYBERGRANTS LLC | $1,000 |
| SCHOOL OF AMERICAN BALLET | $1,000 |
| AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL | $1,000 |
| PLANNED PARENTHOOD | $1,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $1,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY | $500 |
| SIERRA CLUB | $375 |
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 (FY17–20, $33k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 6% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +41% since the first grant, against +17% for the ones you funded once.
27 repeat relationships — 8 still active in FY2024, 19 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $37k 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
- MCMISSISSIPPI CENTER FOR JUSTICE6× · 2017–2024 · $290k · revenue +8%
- UOUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION3× · 2017–2023 · $232k · revenue +46%
- RARAINIER ATHLETES2× · 2017–2018 · $171k · revenue +393% · 32% of their budget
Funded once
- UOUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTONone grant, 2022 · $35k
- UOUNIVERSITY OF WA MEDICAL SCHOOLone grant, 2020 · $10k
- CCCARLE CENTER FOR PHILANTHROPYone grant, 2018 · $10k
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 NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…
The association of washington cities builds connections between our state's diverse cities and towns, while providing our members with the support needed to thrive through delivery of data-driven education, nationally recognized pooling…
Advance science, engineering, and innovation throughout the world for the benefit of all. the world's largest multidisciplinary scientific society and a leading publisher of cutting-edge research through its science family of journals,…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
The mission of the washington education association is to advance the professional interests of its members in order to make public education the best it can be for students, staff, and communities.
American gas association's (the association) mission is to develop and advocate for informed, innovative, and durable policy that fulfills our nation's energy needs, environmental aspirations and economic potential. we are committed to…
The mission of the george washington university (gw) is to educate individuals in liberal arts, languages, sciences, learned professions, and other courses and subjects of study, and to conduct scholarly research and publish the findings…
Seattle academy is a dynamic community that challenges students to question, imagine, and create in order to contribute to a changing world.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Educational & charitable. to provide legal and scientific information to public interest attorneys and scientists in numerous countries.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Children's Alliance and the most unlike its peers is Womens Funding Alliance. 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 38 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.
35 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. 35 of the 60 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 MISSISSIPPI CENTER FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALLIANCE FOR JUSTICE ↗
- Who funds RAINIER ATHLETES ↗
- Who funds CHILD AID ↗
- Who funds PXE INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
- Who funds ODC ↗
- Who funds Oberlin College ↗
- Who funds HERITAGE UNIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds Everett Public Schools Foundation ↗
- Who funds PAUL TAYLOR DANCE FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL OF THE USA INC ↗
- Who funds Elizabeth Home ↗
- Who funds SCHOOL OF AMERICAN BALLET INC ↗
- Who funds EVERETT GOSPEL MISSION ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON BUSINESS ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds NATIVE BIODATA CONSORTIUM ↗
- Who funds HYDROCEPHALUS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds POLY PREP COUNTRY DAY SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds Womens Funding Alliance ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds HOPESOURCE ↗
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: Seattle Foundation · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · The Satterberg Foundation Inc · United Way of King County · McKinstry Charitable Foundation · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Tides Foundation · David & Cathy Habib Foundation · Peach Foundation · The Bullitt Foundation · Moccasin Lake Foundation · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust 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 Hazel Fund 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.
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.