· Private foundation
Titcomb 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ANIMAL FOUNDATION OF GREAT FALLS | $7,275 |
| CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY | $6,000 |
| COLORADO ORGANIZATION FOR LATINA OPPORTUNITY AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS (COLOR | $5,384 |
| RVC SEATTLE | $5,384 |
| RED LODGE TRANSITION SERVICES | $5,384 |
| FRONT AND CENTERED | $5,383 |
| POTLATCH FUND | $5,383 |
| COLECTIVA LEGAL DEL PUEBLO | $5,383 |
| RVC SEATTLE | $5,383 |
| WASHINGTON IMMIGRANT SOLIDARITY NETWORK (WAISN) | $5,383 |
| SOCIAL JUSTICE FUND NORTHWEST | $5,383 |
| MONTANA RAPTOR CONSERVATION CENTER | $5,000 |
| EQUINE VOICES RESCUE & SANCTUARY | $5,000 |
| PEACEFUL VALLEY DONKEY RESCUE INC | $5,000 |
| GENTLE GIANTS DRAFT HORSE RESCUE SOCIETY | $3,640 |
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 (FY17–18, $6k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% 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.
35 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 23 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $12k 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
- AAAnimal Adoption Center Inc8× · 2017–2024 · $86k · revenue +111%
RVC SEATTLE7× · 2019–2025 · $75k · revenue +336%- CLCOLECTIVA LEGAL DEL PUEBLO7× · 2019–2025 · $61k · revenue +30%
Funded once
- CMCHEYENNE MOUNTAIN ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETYone grant, 2024 · $11k
- GFGREAT FALLS COMMUNITY FOOD BANK INCone grant, 2020 · $6k · revenue +21%
- CCCASCADE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETYone grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue 0%
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.
Our mission is to study and restore carnivore populations at risk of extinction and the mountain ecosystems they call home through innovative science, strong partnerships and local community action.
Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…
Creating a greener, healthier, more equitable, and better Washington for all through community outreach, network building, and advocacy for conservation and outdoor recreation funding.
The Animal Refuge League of Greater Portland nurtures the connection between people and pets to advance animal welfare and improve the quality of life in our community.
Washington wild protects and restores wild lands and waters in washington state through advocacy, education and civic engagement.
Wildearth guardians works to protect and restore the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the american west.
Protecting our shrub-steppe and connecting people to this vanishing landscape.
Rogue Climate's mission is to empower Southern Oregon communities most impacted by climate change including low-income, rural, youth, seniors & communities of color, to win climate justice by organizing for clean energy, sustainable jobs &…
A champion for animals since 1967, PAWS is a nationally recognized leader - rehabilitating injured and orphaned wildlife, sheltering and adopting homeless cats and dogs, and educating people to make a better world for animals and people.
As conservation leaders, the red river zoo connects our community to nature and inspires people to help save species.
Partner with detection dogs to further conservation initiatives around the world. Working Dogs for Conservation Foundation (WD4C) integrates scientific-detection dog teams with established management and conservation efforts to address…
Retrieve a golden of the midwest (ragom) rescues, fosters, and rehomes golden retrievers and golden mixes that can no longer remain in their current environments. the organization ensures each dog receives necessary veterinary care and…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Reconciliation Center Inc and the most unlike its peers is Civic Ark. 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 25 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.
39 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. 39 of the 51 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 Animal Adoption Center Inc ↗
- Who funds RVC SEATTLE ↗
- Who funds ANIMAL FOUNDATION OF GREAT FALLS ↗
- Who funds COLECTIVA LEGAL DEL PUEBLO ↗
- Who funds COLORADO ORGANIZATION FOR LATINA OPPORTUNITY AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS ↗
- Who funds Red Lodge Transition Services ↗
- Who funds Got Green ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF PATHWAYS ↗
- Who funds POTLATCH FUND ↗
- Who funds Front and Centered ↗
- Who funds MONTANA RAPTOR CONSERVATION CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds South End Ultimate Program DBA Age Up ↗
- Who funds Paws N Hooves ↗
- Who funds Physicians Committee for Responsible Med ↗
- Who funds Equine Voices Rescue & Sanctuary ↗
- Who funds GENTLE GIANTS DRAFT HORSE RESCUE SOCIETY LTD ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN WILD HORSE PRESERVATION CAMPAIGN ↗
- Who funds CIVIC ARK ↗
- Who funds GREAT FALLS COMMUNITY FOOD BANK INC ↗
- Who funds CHEYENNE MOUNTAIN ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds SOCIAL JUSTICE FUND NORTHWEST ↗
- Who funds CASCADE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Peaceful Valley Donkey Rescue Inc ↗
- Who funds MAGEE-WOMENS RESEARCH INSTITUTE AND FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ST CROIX TRAIL BLAZERS ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST ACCESS FUND ↗
- Who funds LEWIS & CLARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds RAINIER SCHOLARS ↗
- Who funds THE RECONCILIATION CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST NATURAL RESOURCE GROUP ↗
- Who funds SUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST ↗
- Who funds VEGAN OUTREACH INC ↗
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 · Inatai Foundation · Impactassetsinc · Social Justice Fund Northwest · The Satterberg Foundation Inc · Proteus Fund Inc · Roy and Patricia Disney Family Foundation · Groundswell Fund · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · Patagoniaorg · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · The Bullitt Foundation
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 Titcomb 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.
- Red Lodge Transition Services — 12% of income from government
- Sustainable Northwest — 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 Titcomb Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Titcomb 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.