Skip to content
The Springwater Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

The Springwater Foundation Inc

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$15k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2023 to 2025.

International$27kArts & Culture$10kCommunity Improvement$3kHealth$1kHuman Services$1kEducation$100
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$4,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$22k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WORLDWIDE HEART OF HEART MINISTRIES$7,725
PENTACLE THEATRE$4,500
NEZ PERCE WALLOWA BAND HOMELAND PROJECT$2,785
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 (FY23–23, $1k) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%EMPOWER HER: $1k → 7%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.

66%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$29k · 3 repeat orgs$15k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +117% since the first grant, against +9% for those funded once.

3 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

3
6

Total granted

$29k
$10k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+117%
+9%

Still filing today

67%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’23’24’25
Arts & CultureInternationalHealthHuman ServicesEducationOther
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

  • WH
    WORLDWIDE HEART TO HEART MINISTRIES
    3× · 2023–2025 · $22k · revenue -20%
  • NP
    NEZ PERCE WALLOWA BAND HOMELAND PROJECT
    2× · 2023–2025 · $5k
  • RO
    Ray of Hope Portraits
    2× · 2023–2024 · $1k

Funded once

  • DC
    DECE CHARITY
    one grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue 0%
  • LD
    Leadership Development DBA Centered
    one grant, 2023 · $3k · revenue -19%
  • EG
    EMPOWER GRIEVING CHILDREN INC
    one grant, 2023 · $1k · revenue +9%
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
World of Broken Hearts Suha Dabit Photography

Public Charity

Health
2
Patasphere
Arts & Culture
3
Wenar Productions Ltd Dba Actors Conservatory Theatre

Live theater

Arts & Culture
4
Pure Theatre

To create exceptional theatre experiences that enlive thought, ignite dialogue and expand consciousness

Arts & Culture
5
Dalekoarts

theatre company

Arts & Culture
6
World Possible

Connect offline learner's to the world's knowledge.

International
7
StoryTree Theatre Inc
Arts & Culture
8
Opera Modo

Opera performances

Arts & Culture
9
Indonesian Kids Performing Arts

Promote & protect indonesian culture

Arts & Culture
10
Star of Hope International America Inc

Star of Hope Equips children across the world with knowledge, physical well-being, spiritual growth, and social skills through educational programs and local and international partnerships.

International
11
Company Onstage Inc

Theater productions and acting classes for children

Arts & Culture
12
World Stage Theater Company

Performing Arts and Performing Arts Education

Arts & Culture
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Pentacle Theatre Inc; the most unlike its peers is World Stage Theatre. 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

9 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. 9 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
5/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

WORLDWIDE HEART TO HEART MINISTRIES: $22,425 · InternationalWORLDWIDE HEART TO HEART MINISTRIESDECE CHARITY: $5,000 · InternationalDECE CHARITYNEZ PERCE WALLOWA BAND HOMELAND PROJECT: $4,785 · OtherNEZ PERCE WALLOWA BA…Leadership Development DBA Centered: $3,000 · OtherLeadership Developme…PENTACLE THEATRE INC: $4,500 · Arts & CulturePENTACLE THEAT…MAXVILLE HERITAGE INTERPRETIVE CENTER: $500 · Arts & CultureMAXVILLE HERIT…World Stage Theatre: $500 · Arts & CultureWorld Stage Th…Ray of Hope Portraits: $1,400 · HealthEMPOWER GRIEVING CHILDREN INC: $1,000 · Human ServicesMIDDLETON ELEMENTARY PAC % SHERWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT 88J: $100 · Education
International$27,425Other$7,785Arts & Culture$5,500Health$1,400Human Services$1,000Education$100

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetWORLDWIDE HEART TO HEART MINISTRIES: $22,425 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetDECE CHARITY: $5,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetLeadership Development DBA Centered: $3,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetRay of Hope Portraits: $1,400 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetEMPOWER GRIEVING CHILDREN INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMAXVILLE HERITAGE INTERPRETIVE CENTER: $500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWorld Stage Theatre: $500 over 1y, 0.1% 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
American Online Giving Foundation IncDE5.8× affinity4 shared granteesties to 1 of 1Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Springwater Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from The Springwater Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 100%
  • Maxville Heritage Interpretive Center: 100% of income from government
  • Pentacle Theatre Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely 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 Springwater Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to The Springwater Foundation Inc 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.

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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Springwater’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