Skip to content
The Loyal Bigelow and Jedediah Dewey Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

The Loyal Bigelow and Jedediah Dewey Foundation

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.

$56k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0188% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Environment$158kReligion$88kAnimals$36kCommunity Improvement$30kCivil Rights$18kInternational$13kHuman Services$10kYouth Development$9kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
4
States reached
$764k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FRIENDS OF THE SAN JUANS$5,000
THE CHURCH COUNCIL OF GREAT SEATTTLE$5,000
NRDC$5,000
BENEFITS LAW CENTER$5,000
THE JOYCE L SOBEL FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER$5,000
SAN JUAN PRESERVATION TRUST$5,000
SAWHORSE$5,000
NEW VENTURE FUND$5,000
RESOURCES$5,000
PARTNERS IN HEALTH$2,500
SAARC$2,500
YOUNG WOMEN EMPOWERED$2,500
COAST SALISH YOUTH ASSOCIATION$1,250
SAN JUAN COMMUNITY HOME TRUST$1,250
WOLF HOLLOW WILDLIFE REHABILITATION CENTER$1,250
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 (FY23–25, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 67% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Joyce L Sobel Family Resource Center: $5k → 10%THE JOYCE L SOBEL FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER: $5k → 10%BENEFITS LAW CENTER: $5k → 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.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$382k · 20 repeat orgs$58k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +36% since the first grant, against +24% for those funded once.

20 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 13 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
8

Total granted

$382k
$37k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+24%

Still filing today

60%
38%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 62% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $21k 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
EnvironmentAnimalsEducationHuman ServicesInternationalHealthOther
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

  • S
    STAND
    6× · 2019–2024 · $30k · revenue +85%
  • RS
    RE SOURCES
    5× · 2020–2025 · $23k · revenue +36%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF THE SAN JUANS
    4× · 2017–2025 · $20k · revenue +76%

Funded once

  • RT
    REALITY TEAM (Combatting Disinformation About Clim
    one grant, 2021 · $5k
  • HF
    Hackers for Reality Team
    one grant, 2023 · $5k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $5k
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
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
2
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
3
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
4
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
5
Nature for Justice

To empower frontline communities to lead nature-based solutions that advance climate justice, ecosystem restoration, and resilient livelihoods through connecting locally-led initiatives to funding, markets, and technical support.

Environment
6
Nw Energy Coalition

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…

—
7
Northwest Environmental Defense Center

Nedc's mission is to work toward a future in which the pacific northwest leads the nation in developing, implementing & enforcing strong laws and regulations that protect the environment & human health, and where our governments &…

—
8
San Juan Citizens Alliance

The San Juan Citizens Alliance advocates for clean air, pure water, and healthy lands - the foundations of resilient communities, ecosystems and economies in the San Juan Basin.

Environment
9
Earthcorps

To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.

International
10
Friends of the Earth

Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…

Environment
11
Amazon Watch Inc

To protect the rainforest and advance the rights of Indigenous peoples in the Amazon Basin. We partner with Indigenous communities in campaigns for human rights, corporate accountability, and the preservation of the Amazon Basin's…

Environment
12
Turtle Island Restoration Network

To mobilize people in local communities around the world to protect marine wildlife and the oceans and inland watersheds that sustain them.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Stand; the most unlike its peers is Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation. 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

20 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. 20 of the 36 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)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/20
Grantees still filing
12/20
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EARTH MINISTRY: $40,000 · OtherEARTH MINISTRYTHE CHURCH COUNCIL OF GREAT SEATTLE: $40,000 · OtherTHE CHURCH COUNCIL OF GREAT SEATTLEIndividual grant recipient: $33,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientSAWHORSE: $25,000 · OtherSAWHORSEFRIENDS OF THE SAN JUANS: $20,000 · OtherFRIENDS OF THE SAN JUANSSOCIAL JUSTICE FUND: $17,500 · OtherSOCIAL JUSTICE FUNDIndividual grant recipient: $15,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientALASKA VENTURE FUND: $10,000 · OtherNEW VENTURE FUND: $10,000 · OtherNew Venture Fund (THE ALASKA VENTURE FUND): $10,000 · Other+10 more: $37,500 · Other+10 moreSTAND: $30,000 · EnvironmentSTANDRE SOURCES: $23,000 · EnvironmentRE SOURCESTOXIC-FREE FUTURE F/K/A WASHINGTON TOXICS COALITION: $18,000 · EnvironmentTOXIC-FREE FUTURE F/K/A W…THE SAN JUAN PRESERVATION TRUST: $10,000 · EnvironmentTHE SAN JUAN PRESERVATION…NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $10,000 · EnvironmentNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE…Front and Centered: $5,000 · Environment+1 more: $2,000 · EnvironmentPaso Pacifico: $30,000 · AnimalsPaso Pacif…ORCA NETWORK: $10,000 · AnimalsORCA NETWO…+1 more: $1,250 · AnimalsJOYCE L SOBEL FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER: $10,000 · Human ServicesBENEFITS LAW CENTER: $5,000 · Human ServicesWILD WHATCOM: $10,000 · EducationSPRING STREET INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL: $5,000 · EducationTHE LAMBI FUND OF HAITI: $10,000 · InternationalPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $2,500 · Health
Other$258,000Environment$98,000Animals$41,250Human Services$15,000Education$15,000International$10,000Health$2,500

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 budgetEARTH MINISTRY: $40,000 over 7y, 3.5% of budgetPaso Pacifico: $30,000 over 6y, 1.4% of budgetSTAND: $30,000 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetRE SOURCES: $23,000 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetFRIENDS OF THE SAN JUANS: $20,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetTOXIC-FREE FUTURE F/K/A WASHINGTON TOXICS COALITION: $18,000 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetJOYCE L SOBEL FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER: $10,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetTHE SAN JUAN PRESERVATION TRUST: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetWILD WHATCOM: $10,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetTHE LAMBI FUND OF HAITI: $10,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetORCA NETWORK: $10,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetFront and Centered: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSPRING STREET INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetYOUNG WOMEN EMPOWERED: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $2,000 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 EARTH MINISTRY ↗
  • Who funds Paso Pacifico ↗
  • Who funds STAND ↗
  • Who funds RE SOURCES ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF THE SAN JUANS ↗
  • Who funds TOXIC-FREE FUTURE F/K/A WASHINGTON TOXICS COALITION ↗
  • Who funds JOYCE L SOBEL FAMILY RESOURCE CENTER ↗
  • Who funds THE SAN JUAN PRESERVATION TRUST ↗
  • Who funds WILD WHATCOM ↗
  • Who funds THE LAMBI FUND OF HAITI ↗
  • Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds ORCA NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds BENEFITS LAW CENTER ↗
  • Who funds Front and Centered ↗
  • Who funds SPRING STREET INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL ↗
  • Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG WOMEN EMPOWERED ↗
  • Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds SAN JUAN COMMUNITY HOME TRUST ↗
  • Who funds WOLF HOLLOW WILDLIFE REHABILITATION CENTRE ↗

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 FoundationThe GreerSolien FundSan Juan Island Commu…The Northwest Fund fo…The Bullitt FoundationThe Norcliffe Foundat…Washington Conservati…Kaleidoscope Foundati…The Rose Foundation f…ImpactassetsincGrousemont FoundationThe Satterberg Founda…
Seattle FoundationWA21.7× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Seattle Foundation · The GreerSolien Fund · San Juan Island Community Foundation · The Northwest Fund for the Environment · The Bullitt Foundation · The Norcliffe Foundation · Washington Conservation Action Education Fund · Kaleidoscope Foundation · The Rose Foundation for Communities the Environment · Impactassetsinc · Grousemont Foundation · The Satterberg Foundation 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 The Loyal Bigelow and Jedediah Dewey Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Loyal Bigelow and Jedediah Dewey 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%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 0%
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
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 36 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 Loyal Bigelow and Jedediah Dewey’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