Seattle Foundation

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
916013536
IRS 990 coverage
2024–2024
Official website data refreshed
Sep 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Seattle, WA, United States
Phone
206.622.2294
Rating
82
Verdict
STRONG
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Community Foundations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$314,722,382
Expenses
$244,548,637
Assets
$1,449,925,075
Liabilities
$185,172,177

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

27 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • ALESHA WASHINGTON (PRESIDENT & CEO)
  • MICHELE FRIX DASSELL (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT)
  • JOHN KIM (HEALTHIERHERE CEO)

Highest reported compensation

  • ALESHA WASHINGTON (PRESIDENT & CEO): $512,167 total reported compensation
  • MICHELE FRIX DASSELL (EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT): $325,581 total reported compensation
  • LARRY BUYCKS (CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER): $314,512 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To ignite philanthropic giving and community leadership to create a thriving, equitable region.

What it reported doing in 2024

Foundation-directed grantmaking: seattle foundation manages targeted funds, called area of interest funds, on behalf of the community and in partnership with community advisory groups, to support defined interest areas. This includes various programs designed to enhance community well-being and support geographies that have been historically underinvested in. Seattle foundation evaluates organizations and then makes grants that best reflect the intended purpose of the funds. Seattle foundation frequently leads special initiatives designed to address specific community needs across the greater seattle region, including emergency response funds.

Operating model

Revenue model
Mixed. Its operating money came from several sources; no one source provided a clear majority.
Distribution model
Grant intermediary. The nonprofit sent 90% of its reported program spending out as grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

STRONG - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and some filed totals do not add up.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 89
  • Transparency & Controls: 75
  • Accountability: 100
  • Sustainability: 85
  • Growth: NotEnoughData

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.8%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 95.3%; rating input score 95
  • Fundraising efficiency: $212.55 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 94.4%; rating input score 94; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: 2 of 8 controls in place; rating input score 25
    • Claims monitoring procedures: Pass
    • Requires narrative reports: Fail
    • Conducts field audits: Fail
    • May suspend future funding: Fail
    • Requires financial reports: Fail
    • Conducts site visits: Fail
    • Requires grant agreements: Pass
    • May require repayment: Fail
  • Grant itemization coverage: 92%; rating input score 92; 24th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 9 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 100
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 22.3%; rating input score 89; 89th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 5.93; rating input score 87; 87th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.13; rating input score 79; 79th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.1%; rating input score 73; 73rd percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: Limited
  • Revenue growth: Limited
  • Asset growth: Limited

Details

  • What they do: 9 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 85.8% of revenue deployed · 95.3% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 11 of 11 board members independent · 9 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 6 filed program accomplishments · $232.9M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $512K · 27 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $7.3M reported
  • Consistency: 44 of 46 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
  • Schedules: 10 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 5388 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 5362 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight: 6 of 8 not reported.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.
  • Review — Transparency & Controls: Foreign grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.