Skip to content
Warde Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Warde Foundation Inc

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.

$220k
Granted FY2025still arriving
17
Grants FY2025still arriving
5
States reached
$50k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Health$371kRecreation & Sports$68kAnimals$47kArts & Culture$38kEducation$22kCivil Rights$14kReligion$5kHousing & Shelter$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 17 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k9 grants · $40k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $130k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
$7,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$2.3M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
CHMC FOUNDATION$50,000
EASTWOOD RANCH FOUNDATION$25,000
LACER FOUNDATION$25,000
MOUNTAIN HUMANE$20,000
THE LIVING DESERT ZOO & GARDENS$20,000
BOARDING FOR BREAST CANCER$20,000
ST JAMES INN$10,000
NEW YORK PRESBYTERIAN FUND$10,000
SUN VALLEY SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION$7,000
Individual grant recipient$5,000
JOHN A MORAN EYE CENTER$5,000
HOSPICE & PALLIATIVE CARE WR VALLEY$5,000
KILLEBREW-THOMPSON MEMORIAL$5,000
BOOT CAMPAIGN INC$5,000
GENESIS WOMEN'S SHELTER$3,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 24% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%MOUNTAIN HUMANE: $20k → 7%Hearts of Idaho Animal Sanctuary: $5k → 13%THE LIVING DESERT ZOO & GARDENS: $20k → 11%Abandoned Animal Rescue: $5k → 9%BOOT CAMPAIGN INC: $5k → 14%Partnership for Civil Justice: $10k → 14%John Moran Eye Center: $10k → 8%Killebrew Thompson: $20k → 7%HEART OF IDAHO ANIMAL SANCTUARY: $5k → 13%EISENHOWER HEALTH: $300k → 11%ST JAMES INN: $10k → 14%Abandoned Animal Rescue: $5k → 9%GENESIS WOMEN'S SHELTER: $3k → 14%Partnership for Civil Justice: $4k → 14%JOHN A MORAN EYE CENTER: $5k → 8%BLAINE COUNTY EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $10k → 7%Hearts of Idaho Animal Sanctuary: $5k → 13%LACER FOUNDATION: $25k → 14%ABANDONED ANIMAL RESCUE: $5k → 9%MORAN EYE CENTER: $5k → 8%KILLEBREW-THOMPSON MEMORIAL: $5k → 7%John Moran Eye Center: $5k → 8%Mountain Humane: $3k → 7%HUNTSMAN CANCER: $5k → 8%HUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION: $5k → 8%EASTWOOD RANCH FOUNDATION: $25k → 14%Sun Valley Ski Education Foundation: $30k → 7%CHMC FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%Community Library: $10k → 7%CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL MEDICAL FOUNDATION: $3k → 14%Higher Ground: $10k → 7%SUN VALLEY SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $7k → 7%SAINT SEBASTIAN CHURCH: $5k → 14%Sun Valley Symphony: $6k → 7%BOARDING FOR BREAST CANCER: $20k → 14%St Lukes Wood River Foundation: $5k → 7%HOSPICE & PALLIATIVE CARE WR VALLEY: $5k → 7%Argyros Performing Center: $5k → 7%Living with Wolves: $5k → 7%Argyros Performing Center: $5k → 7%St Lukes Foundation: $5k → 7%SUN VALLEY SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $5k → 7%SUN VALLEY SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $23k → 7%Sun Valley Symphony: $6k → 7%KILLEBREW THOMPSON MEMORIAL: $5k → 7%Sun Valley Symphony: $3k → 7%Sun Valley Symphony: $3k → 7%SUN VALLEY MUSIC FESTIVAL: $3k → 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.

34%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$272k · 15 repeat orgs$519k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +12% since the first grant, against +6% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
21

Total granted

$272k
$386k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+12%
+6%

Still filing today

60%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 40% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $133k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthAnimalsArts & CultureReligionEnvironmentHousing & ShelterOther
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

  • SUN VALLEY SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2017–2025 · $65k · revenue +12%
  • ER
    Eastwood Ranch Foundation
    2× · 2017–2025 · $28k · revenue +70%
  • AA
    ABANDONED ANIMAL RESCUE
    3× · 2022–2024 · $15k · revenue +29%

Funded once

  • EM
    Eisenhower Medical Center
    one grant, 2024 · $300k · revenue +6%
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2023 · $20k
  • CL
    Community Library
    one grant, 2020 · $10k
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
St Luke's Wood River Medical Center Ltd

To improve the health of people in the communities we serve.

Health
2
Valley Humane SocietyInc

Valley Humane Society (VHS) creates a brighter future for cats and dogs by encouraging and strengthening the bond between people and pets. VHS rescues and rehabilitates companion animals, champions responsible caretaking, shares pets'…

Animals
3
Upper Valley Humane Society Inc

UVHS improves quality of life for people and pets through an innovative animal shelter and adoption center and through services that reduce suffering, support wellness, and foster compassion.

Animals
4
Animal Rescue of the Rockies

Animal Care and Adoption - ARR's mission is to save the lives of homeless and abandoned dogs and cats. Our goal is reaching a no-kill society in the United States.

Animals
5
Jameson Animal Rescue Ranch

Jameson humane is an impact-driven nonprofit organization whose program model includes a variety of novel solutions and approaches to create a truly unique animal welfare organization that is unlike any animal rescue or sanctuary. jameson…

Animals
6
Sutter Valley Hospitals

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: CARING FOR OUR PATIENTS FIRST AND OUR PEOPLE ALWAYS. VISION: TO BE THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE, INTEGRATED AND CONNECTED HEALTH SYSTEM FOR GETTING AND STAYING WELL. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
7
The Jmt Wilderness Conservancy

Working to restore the watersheds, wilderness, and wildlife in the high sierra nevada following the john muir trail (est. 1915) for all life in california.

Environment
8
Wenatchee Valley Humane Society Inc

The mission of wvhs is to serve the community through education, protection and pet adoptions. we continue our mission by taking care of displaced pets, rescuing injured and lost animals, providing spay/neuter programs, investigating…

Animals
9
Peace River Refuge & Ranch Inc

Forest Animal Rescue protects wildlife by preserving natural habitats for the safe release of rehabilitated animals and the rehabilitation and release of black bears.

Animals
10
Humane Society of the Sierra Foothills

To prevent animal abuse and neglect, enforce the anti-cruelty laws of the State of California and promote the wellbeing of animals.

Animals
11
Sutter Valley Medical Foundation

MISSION STATEMENT: MISSION: Caring for our patients first and our people always. VISION: To be the most comprehensive, integrated and connected health system for getting and staying well. VALUES: EXCELLENCE - We deliver high-quality,…

Health
12
Wolfe Ranch Rescue
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is St Luke's Wood River Foundation Inc; the most unlike its peers is Sun Valley Fire Department. 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

22 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. 22 of the 46 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/22
Grantees still filing
9/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Eisenhower Medical Center: $300,000 · HealthEisenhower Medical CenterBOARDING FOR BREAST CANCER INC: $20,000 · HealthBOARDING FOR BREAST CANCER INC+4 more: $35,500 · Health+4 moreSUN VALLEY SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $65,022 · OtherSUN VALLEY SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION INCCHMC FOUNDATION: $50,000 · OtherCHMC FOUNDATIONLACER Foundation: $25,500 · OtherLACER FoundationIndividual grant recipient: $20,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $18,150 · OtherIndividual grant recipientJohn Moran Eye Center: $15,000 · OtherCommunity Library: $10,000 · OtherArgyros Performing Center: $10,000 · OtherBLAINE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO 61 EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $9,716 · Other+22 more: $66,250 · Other+22 moreEastwood Ranch Foundation: $27,600 · AnimalsEastwood Ranc…ANIMAL SHELTER OF WOOD RIVER VALLEY DBA MOUNTAIN HUMANE: $26,900 · AnimalsANIMAL SHELTE…Heart of Idaho Animal Sanctuary NP Inc: $15,000 · AnimalsHeart of Idah…ABANDONED ANIMAL RESCUE: $15,000 · AnimalsABANDONED ANI…LIVING WITH WOLVES LTD: $7,500 · AnimalsLIVING WITH W…LIVING DESERT THE: $20,000 · EnvironmentPARTNERSHIPFORCIVILJUSTICEFUND: $14,000 · Civil RightsST JAMES INN: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterHIGHER GROUND USA INC: $10,000 · Recreation & Sports
Health$355,500Other$289,638Animals$92,000Environment$20,000Civil Rights$14,000Housing & Shelter$10,000Recreation & Sports$10,000

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 budgetEisenhower Medical Center: $300,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSUN VALLEY SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $65,022 over 4y, 0.7% of budgetEastwood Ranch Foundation: $27,600 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetANIMAL SHELTER OF WOOD RIVER VALLEY DBA MOUNTAIN HUMANE: $26,900 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetLACER Foundation: $25,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLIVING DESERT THE: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOARDING FOR BREAST CANCER INC: $20,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetHeart of Idaho Animal Sanctuary NP Inc: $15,000 over 3y, 3.5% of budgetABANDONED ANIMAL RESCUE: $15,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetPARTNERSHIPFORCIVILJUSTICEFUND: $14,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetST LUKE'S WOOD RIVER FOUNDATION INC: $10,500 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetST JAMES INN: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetHARMON KILLEBREW-DANNY THOMPSON MEMORIAL CANCER FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetHIGHER GROUND USA INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBLAINE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO 61 EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $9,716 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetLIVING WITH WOLVES LTD: $7,500 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetHUNTSMAN CANCER FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetTHE BOOT CAMPAIGN INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetSUN VALLEY SUMMER SYMPHONY INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetSUN VALLEY OPERA COMPANY: $1,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetSUN VALLEY FIRE DEPARTMENT: $1,000 over 1y, 0.6% 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.

National Philanthropi…Donor Advised Charita…Vanguard Charitable E…Fidelity Investments …American Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
National Philanthropic TrustPA8.4× affinity5 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: National Philanthropic Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Warde Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Warde Foundation Inc. 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%5%10%15%20%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–20%
    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 46 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 Warde’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