Skip to content
Volunteers of America Western Washington at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Volunteers of America Western Washington

We serve and empower individuals, families, and communities.

$80M
Granted FY2023
17
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$80k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2019 to 2023.

Food & Nutrition$964k
02FY2023 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 17 grants below total $619,486, the rows itemized in this filing. The $80,481,551 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $79,862,065 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k1 grant · $8k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $349k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $262k
$33,790
Median grant
1
States reached
$57M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Lynnwood Food Bank$80,031
Marysville Food Bank$60,821
Edmonds Food Bank$60,821
Stanwood Food Bank$60,821
Snohomish Food Bank$49,950
Monroe Food Bank$44,661
Lake Stevens Food Bank$40,547
Mill Creek Community Food Bank$33,790
Arlington Food Bank$33,790
Stillaguamish Senior$27,227
Salvation Army$27,032
Concern for Neighbors$27,032
Granite Falls Food Bank$20,274
Maltby Food Bank$17,875
Mukilteo Food Bank$13,516
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 (FY19–23, $82k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%Arlington Food Bank: $34k → 9%Stillaguamish Senior: $27k → 9%Arlington Food Bank: $9k → 9%ARLINGTON FOOD BANK: $4k → 9%ARLINGTON FOOD BANK: $2k → 9%ARLINGTON FOOD BANK: $2k → 9%Stillaguamish Senior: $2k → 9%STILLAGUAMISH SENIOR: $900 → 9%STILLAGUAMISH SENIOR: $600 → 9%STILLAGUAMISH SENIOR: $600 → 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.

100%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$964k · 17 repeat orgs$0 to everyone else

17 repeat relationships: 17 still active in FY2023, 0 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
0

Total granted

$964k
$0

Still filing today

76%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23
Food & NutritionHuman ServicesCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • MC
    MARYSVILLE COMMUNITY FOOD BANK
    7× · 2017–2023 · $104k · revenue +84%
  • SF
    STANWOOD-CAMANO FOOD BANK SERVICES
    7× · 2017–2023 · $91k · revenue +87%
  • SC
    SNOHOMISH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK
    7× · 2017–2023 · $71k · revenue +29%

Funded once

    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
    Lake Chelan Food Bank

    The mission of Lake Chelan Food Bank is to treat each person we serve with dignity and respect and to provide balanced and varied options that give each person the liberty to meet the specific food needs for themsevles and/or their family.

    Food & Nutrition
    2
    South Corvallis Food Bank

    Increase sustainable food security in South Corvallis by providing emergency food and supplies.

    Food & Nutrition
    3
    Foothills Food Bank

    The Foothills Food Bank works to ensure access to quality, nutritious food to community members in need, and deliver services with respect and dignity.

    —
    4
    South County Community Food Bank

    Providing nutritious food to low income families and individuals in south clatsop county

    Food & Nutrition
    5
    Tillman County Food Bank Foundation
    —
    6
    Snoqualmie Valley Food Bank

    Our mission is to provide food and key resources to help our neighbors and community thrive. we lead the effort to feed, educated and advocate ending hunger in the snoqualmie valley and beyond.

    Food & Nutrition
    7
    Nooksack Valley Food Bank Association

    Our mission is to provide a variety of food products to families and individuals who are in need. We are open one day a week.

    Food & Nutrition
    8
    Washington County Food Bank Inc

    Food distribution to needy individuals and families.

    Food & Nutrition
    9
    Asotin County Food Bank Association

    Provide food and other necessities to asotin county residents in need.

    —
    10
    Community Food Bank

    To fight hunger and poverty by providing food, education, programs and resources to families in a dignified, personal and expeditious manner directly as a food pantry and as a food bank; without zip code restrictions.

    Food & Nutrition
    11
    Dickenson County Food Bank

    To provide food to the needy residents of Dickenson County Virginia

    Food & Nutrition
    12
    Columbia Falls Food Bank

    Provide food to local needy

    Food & Nutrition
    How this is measured
    The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Stanwood-Camano Food Bank Services; the most unlike its peers is Hope Creek Charitable 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

    13 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

    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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 17 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)
    13/13
    Grantees still filing
    9/13
    Grew since first funded

    Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

    MARYSVILLE COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $103,918 · OtherMARYSVILLE COMMUNITY FOOD BANKEDMONDS METHODIST CHURCH: $93,418 · OtherEDMONDS METHODIST CHURCHSKY VALLEY FOOD BANK: $83,558 · OtherSKY VALLEY FOOD BANKSNOHOMISH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $71,326 · OtherSNOHOMISH COMMUNITY FOOD BANKLAKE STEVENS COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ASSOCIATION: $59,478 · OtherLAKE STEVENS COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ASSOCIATIONTHE SALVATION ARMY: $46,653 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMYCHRISTIAN FAMILY OF GOD CENTER AND FOOD BANK: $33,940 · OtherCHRISTIAN FAMILY OF GOD CENTER AND FOOD BANKWESTGATE CHAPEL: $21,146 · OtherLYNNWOOD FOOD BANK: $122,994 · Food & NutritionLYNNWOOD FOOD BANKSTANWOOD-CAMANO FOOD BANK SERVICES: $91,318 · Food & NutritionSTANWOOD-CAMANO FOOD BANK SERVICE…CONCERN FOR NEIGHBORS FOOD BANK: $42,453 · Food & NutritionCONCERN FOR NEIGHBORS FOOD BANKMukilteo Food Bank: $21,226 · Food & NutritionMukilteo Food BankDARRINGTON FOOD BANK: $9,617 · Food & NutritionARLINGTON COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $50,966 · Human ServicesARLINGTON COMM…MALTBY FOOD BANK: $38,741 · Human ServicesMALTBY FOOD BA…STILLY VALLEY CENTER: $31,082 · Human ServicesSTILLY VALLEY …HOPE CREEK CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $42,566 · Community Improvement
    Other$513,437Food & Nutrition$287,608Human Services$120,789Community Improvement$42,566

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

    25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetLYNNWOOD FOOD BANK: $122,994 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetMARYSVILLE COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $103,918 over 7y, 1.5% of budgetSTANWOOD-CAMANO FOOD BANK SERVICES: $91,318 over 7y, 2.6% of budgetSKY VALLEY FOOD BANK: $83,558 over 7y, 1.6% of budgetSNOHOMISH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $71,326 over 7y, 2.3% of budgetLAKE STEVENS COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ASSOCIATION: $59,478 over 7y, 1.0% of budgetARLINGTON COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $50,966 over 7y, 1.0% of budgetHOPE CREEK CHARITABLE FOUNDATION: $42,566 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetCONCERN FOR NEIGHBORS FOOD BANK: $42,453 over 7y, 2.6% of budgetMALTBY FOOD BANK: $38,741 over 7y, 2.1% of budgetSTILLY VALLEY CENTER: $31,082 over 7y, 0.6% of budgetMukilteo Food Bank: $21,226 over 7y, 9.3% of budgetDARRINGTON FOOD BANK: $9,617 over 2y, 5.2% 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 LYNNWOOD FOOD BANK ↗
    • Who funds MARYSVILLE COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
    • Who funds STANWOOD-CAMANO FOOD BANK SERVICES ↗
    • Who funds SKY VALLEY FOOD BANK ↗
    • Who funds SNOHOMISH COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
    • Who funds LAKE STEVENS COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ASSOCIATION ↗
    • Who funds ARLINGTON COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
    • Who funds HOPE CREEK CHARITABLE FOUNDATION ↗
    • Who funds CONCERN FOR NEIGHBORS FOOD BANK ↗
    • Who funds MALTBY FOOD BANK ↗
    • Who funds STILLY VALLEY CENTER ↗
    • Who funds Mukilteo Food Bank ↗
    • Who funds DARRINGTON FOOD BANK ↗

    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.

    Food LifelineNorthwest Harvest EmmCommunity Foundation …Puget Sound Energy Fo…The Albertsons Compan…Employees Community F…The Norcliffe Foundat…The Blackbaud Giving …EastWest Food RescueWindermere FoundationCredit Unions in the …Enterprise Holdings F…
    Food LifelineWA36.6× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

    Open a dossier: Food Lifeline · Northwest Harvest Emm · Community Foundation of Snohomish County · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · The Albertsons Companies Foundation · Employees Community Fund of the Boeing Company · The Norcliffe Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · EastWest Food Rescue · Windermere Foundation · Credit Unions in the State of Washington · Enterprise Holdings 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 Volunteers of America Western Washington funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Volunteers of America Western Washington. Bigger dots raise more.

    2024
    ’20’21’22’23’24’25
    no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →
      no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
      0get no government money at all
      5report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
      0rely on government for over half their income
      ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
      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 17 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

      Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $26M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

      Source object · view filing

      Play a game based on Volunteers of America Western Washington’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