· Private foundation
W Bruce Mary Louise Cook 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 FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k10 grants · $31k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $55k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Council for the Homeless | $25,000 |
| Women Donors Network | $20,000 |
| FORA Forging Opportunities for Refu | $10,000 |
| WSU Foundation | $7,000 |
| Corp Accountability Project | $6,000 |
| Big Sky Soul Shine | $5,000 |
| Mt St Helens Institute | $5,000 |
| Xerces Society | $2,000 |
| Cascade Forest Conservancy | $1,500 |
| Columbia Dance Ensemble | $1,000 |
| Columbia Riverkeeper | $1,000 |
| SHARE Inc | $1,000 |
| YWCA Clark County | $1,000 |
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 (FY18–25, $69k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 12% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +58% since the first grant, against +46% for the ones you funded once.
23 repeat relationships — 12 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down; 1 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, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
- WDWOMEN DONORS NETWORK7× · 2018–2025 · $196k · revenue +343%
- FLFRESH LIFELINES FOR YOUTH INC4× · 2018–2021 · $143k · revenue +110%
COUNCIL FOR THE HOMELESS8× · 2018–2025 · $56k · revenue +221%
Funded once
- FOFRIENDS OF THE BIG SKY COMMUNITY LIBRARYgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +29%
- TVTHE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTERone grant, 2020 · $10k · revenue -34%
- TUTHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue +46%
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.
To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.
We take a joyful, community-oriented approach to raising engaged citizens, deep learners, and brave adventurers with the skills, creativity, and heart needed to better the world.
Ca fwd drives action to identify solutions that can be taken to scale to meet the challenges the state is facing. the organization is driven by the belief that regional solutions across the state will help ensure economic, environmental,…
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.…
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 &…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
Building a movement of diverse, upwardly mobile college grads overcoming underemployment through digital skills and peer connections.
To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.
Eastern national promotes the public's understanding and support of america's national parks and other public trust partners by providing quality educational experiences, products and services.
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
The Climate Center is a climate and energy policy nonprofit working to rapidly reduce climate pollution at scale, starting in California.
The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Accelerate Change Inc and the most unlike its peers is Confidence 2 Succeed. 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 26 years old; the field is 14. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 24% startups (under 5 years old) — 10% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% 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.
34 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. 34 of the 50 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 WOMEN DONORS NETWORK ↗
- Who funds FRESH LIFELINES FOR YOUTH INC ↗
- Who funds COUNCIL FOR THE HOMELESS ↗
- Who funds THE ART OF YOGA PROJECT ↗
- Who funds PRISON UNIVERSITY PROJECT INC DBA MOUNT TAMALPAIS COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds CASCADE FOREST CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds My Digital TAT2 Inc ↗
- Who funds COLUMBIA DANCE ENSEMBLE ↗
- Who funds SHARE ↗
- Who funds Columbia Riverkeeper ↗
- Who funds PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF AMERICA INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE BIG SKY COMMUNITY LIBRARY ↗
- Who funds THE VOTER PARTICIPATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds XERCES SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds VIDA VERDE NATURE EDUCATION ↗
- Who funds YWCA USA INC ↗
- Who funds FOCUS FOR DEMOCRACY FUND ↗
- Who funds Eagle Mount ↗
- Who funds WORKING AMERICA EDUCATION FUND ↗
- Who funds YWCA CLARK COUNTY ↗
- Who funds Inclusion Matters by Shanes Inspiration ↗
- Who funds Community Services Northwest ↗
- Who funds ACCELERATE CHANGE INC ↗
- Who funds MORNINGSTAR LEARNING CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds GIRLVENTURES ↗
- Who funds FISH OF VANCOUVER ↗
- Who funds WALLOWA LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds FIRST NATIONS DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE ↗
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: Silicon Valley Community Foundation · East Bay Community Foundation · Tides Foundation · Southwest Washington Regional Health Alliance · The Swigert Foundation · The Firstenburg Foundation · Onpoint Community Credit Union · Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation Trust · Patagoniaorg · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · Marin Community Foundation · The San Francisco 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 W Bruce Mary Louise Cook 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.
- Xerces Society Inc — 22% of income from government
- Wallowa Land Trust — 3% of income from government
- Columbia Riverkeeper — 1% 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.