Westwind Foundation

WestWind Foundation is a family-controlled private foundation established in 1989 and led by CEO Edward M. Miller and President Janet Miller, both of whom draw no personal compensation — a structure typical of donor-controlled philanthropies where the founders remain deeply invested in mission alignment. Day-to-day grantmaking is managed by Program Manager Paul Hess, who earned $274,007 in FY2024, a compensation level signaling a professionally run operation where staff judgment carries significant weight in funding decisions. Any serious applicant should direct relationship-building efforts toward Hess as the primary programmatic contact.

The foundation's giving philosophy centers on long-term general operating support for organizations working at the intersection of environmental conservation and reproductive health. Nearly every grant in the foundation's 294-grant database is designated "to fund operating needs," reflecting a deep commitment to unrestricted support rather than project-specific funding. This approach demonstrates institutional trust — WestWind deploys dollars to organizations it believes in, not to deliverables it wants to control.

WestWind is explicitly relationship-driven and historically difficult to enter as a new applicant. Inside Philanthropy notes the foundation "tends to favor groups with which it has worked in the past, making it difficult for newcomers to gain a foothold." The majority of tracked grantees received two grants in the database, confirming a pattern of returning to proven partners. Advocates for Youth, the largest single recipient, received $4,989,720 across two grants — roughly 42% of the tracked grant total — illustrating how deeply WestWind commits to flagship relationships.

The foundation does not accept unsolicited proposals. Interested organizations must first submit a letter of inquiry (LOI), which triggers a review that can culminate in a full proposal invitation. However, as of the most recent available intelligence from Inside Philanthropy, WestWind's LOI process "appears to be on hold for the foreseeable future," suggesting a consolidation phase rather than active portfolio expansion.

First-time applicants should approach WestWind with patience and a long-horizon perspective. The optimal entry strategy is to build relationships within the shared grantee community — organizations like Virginia Organizing, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Center for Reproductive Rights, or Appalachian Voices — and to signal consistent, demonstrated alignment with WestWind's two core pillars: clean energy transition and reproductive health rights, with special emphasis on Virginia and the Southeast for environmental work, and Latin America and the Caribbean for reproductive health.

WestWind Foundation has distributed between $4.1 million and $7.1 million annually over the past decade, with a pronounced step-up in giving beginning in FY2021. Fiscal year 2022 represented the historical peak at $7,098,262 in total giving ($6,141,844 in grants paid), followed by $6,909,220 in FY2023 ($5,869,820 grants paid). The FY2024 filing shows $6,053,591 in charitable disbursements — a modest moderation but still 47% above the pre-2021 level of ~$4.1M. This elevated payout rate is occurring against a backdrop of declining assets: total assets peaked at $104.8M in FY2019 and have declined to $87.9M in FY2024, suggesting the foundation is consciously drawing down assets to maintain higher grant levels rather than preserving endowment principal.

Across 294 tracked grants totaling $12,011,664, the average grant size is $40,856. However, this figure is substantially skewed by a small number of very large anchor investments. Advocates for Youth alone received $4,989,720 across two grants — representing 42% of the entire tracked total. Removing this single relationship, the remaining 292 grants average approximately $24,000 each, which is far more representative of the typical grantee experience. Most recurring grantees in the portfolio receive between $30,000 and $100,000 per funding cycle, with mid-tier environmental grantees (e.g., Ceres, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, Appalachian Voices) clustered around $85,000 for two grants combined.

Geographically, Virginia dominates with 83 of 294 tracked grants, followed by Massachusetts (48), New York (33), Maine (31), and Washington, D.C. (29). California received 15 grants and Colorado 7, confirming selective national reach but a clear Mid-Atlantic and Northeast concentration for environmental work.

By program area, approximately 55–60% of tracked grantees work in environmental advocacy — clean energy, climate action, coastal conservation, land and water — while roughly 35–40% address reproductive health and rights, including international grantees (DKT International, $654,775; Fos Feminista, $400,000; Marie Stopes International, $300,000). A small discretionary category funds youth development through the Building Better Communities program, though this program is not accessible via LOI.

WestWind does not fund capital campaigns, endowments, or construction, and almost never restricts grants to specific projects. General operating support is the dominant grant type by a wide margin.

WestWind occupies a distinctive niche as one of the few mid-sized private foundations that actively funds both environmental conservation and reproductive health simultaneously under a unified family-controlled mission. Its $87.9M asset base places it above most single-issue reproductive health funders but well below conservation-focused powerhouses like Wilburforce Foundation, which gives roughly twice as much annually and focuses exclusively on land and species conservation in the American West. Unlike the Turner Foundation — which maintains a relatively accessible LOI process and shares WestWind's dual focus on environment and population — WestWind's application pathway is currently reported as closed to new applicants, making it a harder target in the near term. Compared to Compton Foundation, which has broader issue diversity including peacebuilding and human rights, WestWind's tighter two-pillar identity gives it a more concentrated and predictable programmatic focus. Grant seekers already in relationship with peer funders across Virginia-based climate work, Southeast energy advocacy, or Latin American reproductive health programming are best positioned to secure a warm introduction to WestWind's Program Manager Paul Hess.

No public announcements, press releases, or media coverage specific to WestWind Foundation were found for 2025 or 2026, consistent with the foundation's deliberately low public profile. WestWind does not publish annual reports, public newsletters, or press releases — an intentional posture for a private family foundation.

The most significant recent signal is the FY2024 990-PF filed November 17, 2025, confirming $6,053,591 in charitable disbursements. Leadership remains unchanged: Edward M. Miller serves as CEO and Trustee (uncompensated), Janet Miller as President and Trustee (uncompensated), and Paul Hess continues as Program Manager at $274,007 in annual compensation, up from $235,830 in FY2022 and $220,532 in FY2021 — a consistent upward compensation trajectory reflecting Hess's growing central role in grantmaking.

Financially, the foundation's asset base has declined from a $104.8M peak in FY2019 to $87.9M in FY2024, driven by a payout rate that has consistently exceeded investment income in recent years. Net investment income was $1,544,508 in FY2023 and $1,149,679 in FY2022, while grants paid exceeded $5.8M and $6.1M respectively — a structural gap that is gradually drawing down the endowment. This trajectory bears watching: if assets continue declining, a future reduction in annual giving is plausible within 5–7 years.

The operationally significant recent development is the reported pause in the LOI process noted by Inside Philanthropy, which suggests the foundation is in a deliberate consolidation mode — a posture that may persist until asset levels stabilize or the Millers decide to reopen the portfolio to new entrants.

The most important intelligence for any prospective WestWind applicant: the foundation's LOI process is reported as "on hold for the foreseeable future" by Inside Philanthropy. Before drafting any materials, email info@westwindfoundation.org to confirm whether the process has reopened. Investing time in a proposal for a foundation not currently accepting inquiries is a strategic error that can be avoided with a single email.

Assuming the LOI window is open, every submission must include (1) relevant contact information for the organization and (2) a copy of the IRS 501(c)(3) determination letter. Only electronic submissions are accepted — no paper mail. The LOI should be concise and mission-driven, clearly establishing that the organization's core work addresses at least one of WestWind's two explicit pillars: clean energy transition / environmental conservation, or reproductive health services / reproductive rights advocacy. If the work does not map cleanly to one of these pillars, the application will not advance regardless of organizational quality.

Mirror WestWind's own language in any LOI or proposal: use phrases like "fighting climate change," "curtailing fossil fuels," "clean energy future," "reproductive health and rights," and "adolescent development." Organizations working in Virginia, the Southeast, or internationally in Latin America and the Caribbean should highlight that geographic alignment explicitly — these are documented priority regions.

Relationship cultivation is not optional — it is the primary competitive differentiator at WestWind. Research current grantees (all publicly available on ProPublica, EIN 52-6358830) and identify peer organizations in your field. A personal introduction to Paul Hess through a mutual grantee contact significantly outperforms a cold LOI submission. Budget 12–18 months for relationship-building before expecting a funding decision if you are a new entrant.

Do not apply for capital campaigns, endowments, or construction projects — WestWind's entire grant record contains zero such awards. General operating support requests aligned with organizational mission are far more competitive than project-restricted asks with narrow deliverables and specific outputs.

For returning grantees: the interim report is due on the same deadline cycle as your renewal proposal. Missing or late interim reports are a serious risk to continued funding — allocate staff capacity accordingly and submit both documents simultaneously.