Skip to content
Wiancko Charitable Foundation Inc at a glance

· Private foundation

Wiancko Charitable Foundation Inc

Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$1.6M
Granted FY2024still arriving
35
Grants FY2024still arriving
8
States reached
$260k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2024.

Environment$5.2MHealth$1.3MInternational$420kSocial Science$400kAnimals$372kScience & Tech$190kCommunity Improvement$184kCrime & Legal$140kOther$0
02FY2024 · 35 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $5k
  • $10k–50k23 grants · $680k
  • $50k–250k10 grants · $655k
  • $250k+1 grant · $260k
$35,000
Median grant
8
States reached
$37M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
PLANNED PARENTHOOD$260,000
ALAN GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE$100,000
OREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL$85,000
CLIMATE SOLUTIONS$75,000
MSI UNITED STATES$75,000
ENVIRONMENT AMERICA RESEARCH AND POLICY CENTER$65,000
ALASKA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION$55,000
AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION$50,000
ECOTRUST$50,000
NRDC$50,000
ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE$50,000
CASCADIA WILDLANDS$45,000
UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS$40,000
NORTHWEST ENERGY COALITION$40,000
CONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL$40,000
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 (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 79% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%EARTHJUSTICE: $85k → 10%STAND EARTH (FORMERLY FOREST ETHICS): $65k → 10%NRDC: $50k → 17%OREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $85k → 12%ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE: $50k → 12%ENVIRONMENT AMERICA RESEARCH AND POLICY CENTER: $65k → 12%CLIMATE SOLUTIONS: $75k → 9%COLUMBIA LAND TRUST: $120k → 9%MORGAN STANLEY GIVING: $495k → 9%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $395k → 20%ALASKA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $55k → 10%EARTHJUSTICE: $85k → 10%STAND EARTH (FORMERLY FOREST ETHICS): $60k → 10%NATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $50k → 17%ALAN GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE: $100k → 14%OREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $70k → 12%ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE: $50k → 12%WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $65k → 9%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $260k → 20%EARTHJUSTICE: $85k → 10%STAND EARTH (FORMERLY FOREST ETHICS): $60k → 10%NATURAL RESOURCE DEFENSE FUND: $50k → 17%ALAN GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE: $100k → 14%OREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $70k → 12%ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE: $50k → 12%WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $60k → 9%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $250k → 20%EARTHJUSTICE: $70k → 10%NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL: $50k → 17%ALAN GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE: $100k → 14%OREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $55k → 12%ROCKY MOUNTAIN INSTITUTE: $50k → 12%CLIMATE SOLUTIONS: $55k → 9%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $205k → 20%ALAN GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE: $100k → 14%OREGON ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL: $50k → 12%CLIMATE SOLUTIONS: $50k → 9%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER WA AND ID: $158k → 20%OCEAN CONSERVANCY: $56k → 14%ECOTRUST: $50k → 12%CLIMATE SOLUTIONS: $50k → 9%AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION: $50k → 14%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $65k → 17%POPULATION ACTION INTL: $50k → 14%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $60k → 17%ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND: $60k → 17%VERDE: $55k → 12%OREGON BUSINESS COUNCIL: $55k → 12%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

AK
WA
ID
NY
MA
OR
CA
CO
AZ
DC
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.

87%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$7.8M · 47 repeat orgs$1.1M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +28% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

47 repeat relationships: 33 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

47
20

Total granted

$7.8M
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+28%
+15%

Still filing today

83%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $57k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentInternationalHealthPhilanthropyHousing & ShelterAnimalsOther
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

  • OE
    Oregon Environmental Council
    5× · 2020–2024 · $330k · revenue +1%
  • EARTHJUSTICE
    4× · 2020–2023 · $325k · revenue +16%
  • WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC
    5× · 2020–2024 · $309k · revenue +28%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2020 · $495k
  • PP
    PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER WA AND ID
    one grant, 2020 · $158k
  • OB
    OREGON BUSINESS COUNCIL
    one grant, 2020 · $55k · revenue +15%
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
Northwest Environmental Defense Center

Nedc's mission is to work toward a future in which the pacific northwest leads the nation in developing, implementing & enforcing strong laws and regulations that protect the environment & human health, and where our governments &…

—
2
Cascade Climate Inc

To accelerate progress in interventions that harness Earths natural systems to stabilize the climate.

Environment
3
Center for Sustainable Economy

Promoting economic sustainability

Environment
4
Washington Forest Law Center

Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.

—
5
Rainforest Trust

Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.

International
6
Environment Now
—
7
Rainforest Foundation Inc

The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.

Environment
8
Environmental Investigation Agency

To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.

International
9
Fsc I&P

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.…

Philanthropy
10
CalWild

The California Wilderness Coalition protects the natural landscapes that make California unique, providing clean air and water, a home to wildlife, and a place for recreation and spiritual renewal.

—
11
National Caucus of Environmental Legislators

The national caucus of environmental legislators empowers a nonpartisan network of legislative champions to protect, conserve, and improve the natural and human environment.

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 Environment America Research and Policy Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Treesong Nature Awareness and Retreat Center. 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

55 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. 55 of the 70 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)
11
Early backer (in before they grew)
55/55
Grantees still filing
40/55
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $1,110,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOODIndividual grant recipient: $495,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientALAN GUTTMACHER INSTITUTE: $400,000 · OtherALAN GUTTMACHER INSTITUTECLIMATE SOLUTIONS: $275,000 · OtherCLIMATE SOLUTIONSRocky Mountain Institute: $235,000 · OtherRocky Mountain InstituteSTAND EARTH (FORMERLY FOREST ETHICS): $230,000 · OtherECOTRUST: $181,000 · OtherCONSERVATION INTERNATIONAL: $180,000 · OtherPLANNED PARENTHOOD OF GREATER WA AND ID: $158,000 · OtherNW ENERGY COALITION: $145,000 · Other+22 more: $935,000 · Other+22 moreOregon Environmental Council: $330,000 · EnvironmentOregon Environmental CouncilEARTHJUSTICE: $325,000 · EnvironmentEARTHJUSTICEWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $308,500 · EnvironmentWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INCCOLUMBIA LAND TRUST: $245,000 · EnvironmentCOLUMBIA LAND TRUSTALASKA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $225,000 · EnvironmentALASKA CONSERVATION FOUNDATIONENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $220,000 · EnvironmentENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATEDOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $206,000 · EnvironmentOCEAN CONSERVANCYNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $180,000 · EnvironmentColumbia Riverkeeper: $152,000 · EnvironmentSightline Institute: $148,000 · EnvironmentWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND: $145,000 · EnvironmentECOFLIGHT: $124,000 · EnvironmentTHE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC: $118,000 · Environment+16 more: $705,500 · Environment+16 moreTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $190,000 · InternationalEarthcorps: $105,000 · InternationalPATHFINDER INTERNATIONAL: $30,000 · InternationalPOPULATION ACTION INTERNATIONAL: $180,000 · HealthIBIS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INC: $65,000 · HealthAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $240,000 · AnimalsMSI US: $210,000 · PhilanthropyROCKEFELLER FAMILY FUND INC: $20,000 · PhilanthropyVerde Inc: $115,000 · Employment
Other$4,344,000Environment$3,432,000International$325,000Health$245,000Animals$240,000Philanthropy$230,000Employment$115,000

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 budgetOregon Environmental Council: $330,000 over 5y, 3.6% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $325,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetWORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC: $308,500 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetCLIMATE SOLUTIONS: $275,000 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetCOLUMBIA LAND TRUST: $245,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetAFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC: $240,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetRocky Mountain Institute: $235,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetALASKA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION: $225,000 over 5y, 1.6% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED: $220,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetMSI US: $210,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetOCEAN CONSERVANCY: $206,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetTHE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC: $190,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetECOTRUST: $181,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetPOPULATION ACTION INTERNATIONAL: $180,000 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetNATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC: $180,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetColumbia Riverkeeper: $152,000 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetSightline Institute: $148,000 over 5y, 1.4% of budgetWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND: $145,000 over 3y, 1.5% of budgetNW ENERGY COALITION: $145,000 over 4y, 3.0% of budgetENVIRONMENTAL LAW ALLIANCE WORLDWIDE: $140,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetECOFLIGHT: $124,000 over 5y, 3.1% of budgetTHE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC: $118,000 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetVerde Inc: $115,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetFriends of the Columbia Gorge: $115,000 over 5y, 4.1% of budgetEarthcorps: $105,000 over 5y, 0.8% of budgetWESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY: $95,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetSUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST: $90,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetCASCADIA WILDLANDS: $85,000 over 3y, 4.5% of budgetENVIRONMENT AMERICA RESEARCH AND POLICY CENTER INC: $78,500 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetLEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $76,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetIBIS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INC: $65,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetCITIZENS UTILITY BOARD: $63,000 over 3y, 2.1% of budgetCONSERVATION NW: $60,000 over 2y, 1.2% of budgetOREGON BUSINESS COUNCIL: $55,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetBeyond Toxics: $55,000 over 3y, 3.4% of budgetFORTERRA NW: $50,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetBARK: $45,000 over 5y, 2.7% of budgetSUNRISE MOVEMENT EDUCATION FUND: $40,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetWESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER: $35,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetOregon for Climate Action: $33,000 over 2y, 15% of budgetPATHFINDER INTERNATIONAL: $30,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetThe Partnership Project Inc: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNATUREBRIDGE: $23,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetROCKEFELLER FAMILY FUND INC: $20,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCRAG LAW CENTER: $20,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetADVOCATES FOR THE WEST INC: $15,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetAgricultural Research Foundation: $15,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.9% 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 Oregon Environmental Council ↗
  • Who funds EARTHJUSTICE ↗
  • Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
  • Who funds CLIMATE SOLUTIONS ↗
  • Who funds COLUMBIA LAND TRUST ↗
  • Who funds AFRICAN WILDLIFE FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Rocky Mountain Institute ↗
  • Who funds ALASKA CONSERVATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds MSI US ↗
  • Who funds OCEAN CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
  • Who funds ECOTRUST ↗
  • Who funds POPULATION ACTION INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
  • Who funds Columbia Riverkeeper ↗
  • Who funds Sightline Institute ↗
  • Who funds WASHINGTON CONSERVATION ACTION EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds NW ENERGY COALITION ↗
  • Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL LAW ALLIANCE WORLDWIDE ↗
  • Who funds ECOFLIGHT ↗
  • Who funds THE GRAND CANYON TRUST INC ↗
  • Who funds Verde Inc ↗
  • Who funds Friends of the Columbia Gorge ↗
  • Who funds Earthcorps ↗
  • Who funds WESTERN RIVERS CONSERVANCY ↗
  • Who funds SUSTAINABLE NORTHWEST ↗
  • Who funds CASCADIA WILDLANDS ↗
  • Who funds ENVIRONMENT AMERICA RESEARCH AND POLICY CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND ↗
  • Who funds IBIS REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH INC ↗
  • Who funds CITIZENS UTILITY BOARD ↗
  • Who funds CONSERVATION NW ↗

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 Bullitt FoundationPatagoniaorgMeyer Memorial TrustThe Oregon Community …The Lazar FoundationUnited States Energy …Resources Legacy FundThe Nature ConservancyThe Collins FoundationSeattle FoundationClimate SolutionsOregon Environmental …
The Bullitt FoundationWA40.4× affinity17 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Bullitt Foundation · Patagoniaorg · Meyer Memorial Trust · The Oregon Community Foundation · The Lazar Foundation · United States Energy Foundation · Resources Legacy Fund · The Nature Conservancy · The Collins Foundation · Seattle Foundation · Climate Solutions · Oregon Environmental Council

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 Wiancko Charitable Foundation Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Wiancko Charitable Foundation Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 90%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Ecotrust: 14% of income from government
  • Beyond Toxics: 13% of income from government
  • Conservation Biology Institute: 9% of income from government
  • Ibis Reproductive Health Inc: 9% of income from government
  • Sustainable Northwest: 5% of income from government
  • Verde Inc: 3% of income from government
  • Oregon Business Council: 3% of income from government
  • Bark: 2% of income from government
  • Columbia Riverkeeper: 1% of income from government
  • Western Rivers Conservancy: 0% of income from government
  • Community Energy Project Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
9get no government money at all
6report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Wiancko Charitable Foundation Inc?

Find your warmest path to Wiancko Charitable Foundation Inc 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.

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 70 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Wiancko’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