Skip to content
Vital Spark Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Vital Spark Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$724k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$358k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Philanthropy$716kEnvironment$88kHealth$32kAnimals$23kHuman Services$20kEducation$19kCrime & Legal$19kYouth Development$19kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k2 grants · $8k
  • $250k+2 grants · $716k
$357,793
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Harriet Arthur Memorial Charitable$357,793
SMJ Spark Foundation$357,793
White Coat Waste Project$5,000
Harriet Arthur Memorial Ch Tr$3,348
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 (FY18–21, $39k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%Innocence Project: $9k → 17%US Right to Know: $20k → 10%Innocence Project: $5k → 17%Innocence Project: $5k → 17%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.

Which US states its grants reach

VT
MN
WI
NY
OR
IN
OH
PA
CT
CA
AZ
NC
DC
LA
TX
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.

18%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$171k · 7 repeat orgs$802k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +79% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
18

Total granted

$171k
$83k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+79%
0%

Still filing today

86%
61%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 1% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $719k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsPhilanthropyHuman ServicesEducationYouth DevelopmentPublic BenefitOther
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

  • CF
    CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC
    5× · 2018–2024 · $61k · revenue +123%
  • TI
    THE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC
    3× · 2018–2020 · $19k · revenue +178%
  • PM
    POPULATION MEDIA CENTER INC
    3× · 2018–2020 · $19k · revenue +27%

Funded once

  • UR
    US RIGHT TO KNOW
    one grant, 2021 · $20k · revenue -34%
  • PR
    PACIFIC REPERTORY THEATREgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $10k · revenue +273%
  • FS
    Forest Svc EmployeesEnvironment Eth
    one grant, 2021 · $9k
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 Animal Protection

World animal protection is a global organization working to end factory farming and wildlife exploitation. we expose cruel systems, promote animal-friendly alternatives, and influence policy change. for over 75 years, we've been rewriting…

Animals
2
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
3
World Wildlife Fund Inc

Wwf's mission is to conserve nature and reduce the most pressing threats to the diversity of life on earth. (continued on schedule o)

Environment
4
American Humane Association

Founded in 1877, american humane association, dba american humane society (american humane) is committed to ensuring the safety, welfare and well-being of animals. our leadership programs are first to serve in promoting and nurturing the…

Animals
5
The Union of Concerned Scientists Inc

The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.

International
6
Panthera Corporation

Panthera's mission is the conservation of the world's 40 wild cat species, many of which are endangered or threatened. panthera develops, implements and oversees wild cat conservation strategies on a global scale.

Animals
7
Center for Responsible Science
Philanthropy
8
Conservation International Foundation

Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.

Environment
9
Oceana Inc

To advocate for policy changes by governments and corporations in order to preserve ocean life and return the oceans to their former abundance.

Environment
10
Nonhuman Rights Project Inc

The Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) is the only civil rights organization in The United States dedicated solely to securing fundamental rights for nonhuman animals and the leading force in building a national and global nonhuman rights…

Animals
11
Open Markets Institute

The open markets institute works to help people relearn how to use competition policy to build stronger democracies, more just and equitable societies, more innovative and sustainable economies, and a more secure and peaceful world.

Education
12
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
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jane Goodall Institute for Wildlife Research Education and Conservation; the most unlike its peers is Smj Spark Foundation. 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

18 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. 18 of the 28 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)
18/18
Grantees still filing
9/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Harriet Arthur Memorial Charitable: $357,793 · OtherHarriet Arthur Memorial CharitablePlanned Parenthood Monterey Co: $19,000 · Other+14 more: $61,348 · Other+14 moreSMJ SPARK FOUNDATION: $357,793 · PhilanthropySMJ SPARK FOUNDATION+1 more: $1,000 · PhilanthropyCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC: $61,000 · AnimalsCENTER FO…THE WHITE COAT WASTE PROJECT INC: $18,000 · AnimalsTHE WHITE…+3 more: $4,000 · AnimalsUS RIGHT TO KNOW: $20,000 · Human ServicesTHE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $19,000 · Human ServicesPOPULATION MEDIA CENTER INC: $19,000 · EducationREADING LEGACIES: $19,000 · Youth DevelopmentORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION: $16,000 · Public Benefit
Other$438,141Philanthropy$358,793Animals$83,000Human Services$39,000Education$19,000Youth Development$19,000Public Benefit$16,000

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 budgetCENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY INC: $61,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetUS RIGHT TO KNOW: $20,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetTHE INNOCENCE PROJECT INC: $19,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetPOPULATION MEDIA CENTER INC: $19,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetREADING LEGACIES: $19,000 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetTHE WHITE COAT WASTE PROJECT INC: $18,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetORGANIC CONSUMERS ASSOCIATION: $16,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetPACIFIC REPERTORY THEATRE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetJOSEPHINE KERNES MEMORIAL POOL: $2,500 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetJANE GOODALL INSTITUTE FOR WILDLIFE RESEARCH EDUCATION AND CONSERVATION: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetINSTITUTE OF NOETIC SCIENCES: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetPeaceful Valley Donkey Rescue Inc: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMARA ELEPHANT PROJECT USA INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetCHIMP HAVEN INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetLANTERN THEATER COMPANY: $500 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.

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.

The Chicago Community…National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Chicago Community TrustIL13.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Chicago Community Trust · National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Vital Spark Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Vital Spark 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%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
    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 28 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 Vital Spark’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