Skip to content
Arthur M James Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Arthur M James Family Foundation

Its FY2021 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.

$60k
Granted FY2020
12
Grants FY2020
3
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

66% of Arthur M James Family Foundation’s FY2021 grant dollars went to Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2021 names 3 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2020, the last year Arthur M James Family Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 9 organizations, $60k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

7
’17
5
’18
1
’19
9
’20
3
’21

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

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 2021.

Philanthropy$524kEnvironment$166kHealth$137kEducation$131kHuman Services$34kFood & Nutrition$28kEmployment$25kReligion$12kOther$0
02FY2020 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2020

  • Under $10k10 grants · $40k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $20k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FARESTART$10,000
SHRINERS HOSPITAL PORTLAND$10,000
JEFFERSON LAND TRUST$5,000
SOUTH PENINSULA HAVEN HOUSE$5,000
SOUTH CLATSOP FOOD BANK$5,000
NORTH OLYMPIC LAND TRUST$5,000
NORTH COAST LAND CONSERVANCY$5,000
HOMER COMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY$5,000
CASA LATINA$3,000
NORTHWEST HARVEST EMM$3,000
NORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT$3,000
RAINIER VALLEY COOPERATIVE PRESCHOO$1,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY17–20, $12k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%HOMER COMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY: $5k → 11%SOUTH PENINSULA HAVEN HOUSE: $5k → 11%ALBERTINA KERR CENTERS: $2k → 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
OR
OH
CA
KY
MD
TX
FL
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.

33%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$177k · 6 repeat orgs$365k to everyone else

6 repeat relationships: 5 still active in FY2020, 1 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call). Read against FY2020, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
10

Total granted

$177k
$72k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-4%
+167%

Still filing today

83%
60%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2021, 5% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $258k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21
EnvironmentHuman ServicesEducationEmploymentHealthOther
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

  • RM
    RACE MD
    2× · 2017–2019 · $111k · revenue -32%
  • NO
    NORTH OLYMPIC LAND TRUST
    2× · 2020–2021 · $18k · revenue -4%
  • F
    FARESTART
    2× · 2017–2020 · $17k · revenue -25%

Funded once

  • FH
    FISHER HOUSE FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $11k · revenue +32%
  • LA
    LOAVES AND FISHES CENTERS
    one grant, 2017 · $11k
  • DR
    Duwamish River Cleanup Coalition - TAGgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +371%
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
Oregon Agricultural Trust

Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.

Environment
2
Great Peninsula Conservancy

Preserve in perpetuity the natural habitats, rural landscapes, and open spaces of the great peninsula of washington's puget sound.

Environment
3
Minnesota Land Trust

The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.

Environment
4
McKenzie River Trust

Acquire and manage land and conservation easements through purchase and donation to ensure long term conservation of clean water, fish and wildlife habitat, and other community values.

Environment
5
Amazon Conservation Association

Amazon conservation unites science, people, and innovation to protect the amazon - the greatest wild forest on earth. as guardians of the most iconic forest on the planet, we bring together the power of the latest science and technology…

Environment
6
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
7
Eastern National

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.

Recreation & Sports
8
Connecticut Farmland Trust Inc

Protect Connecticuts farmland for agricultural use by purchasing and accepting donations of agricultural conservation easements

Food & Nutrition
9
Washington Area Community Investment Fund Inc

The washington area community investment fund (wacif) is a nonprofit community loan fund focused on increasing equity and economic opportunity in the washington, dc area's underserved communities. wacif's mission is driven is driven by…

—
10
Cowiche Canyon Conservancy

Protecting our shrub-steppe and connecting people to this vanishing landscape.

—
11
Arizona Community Foundation

To lead, serve and collaborate to mobilize enduring philanthropy for a better arizona.

Philanthropy
12
Senior Life Resources Northwest

To preserve and enhance the quality of life at home, with dignity and care.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jefferson Land Trust; the most unlike its peers is Race Md. 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 30 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/22
Grantees still filing
14/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

AMERICAN ENDOWMENT FOUNDATION: $131,000 · PhilanthropyAMERICAN ENDOWMENT FOUNDATI…DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING INC: $131,000 · PhilanthropyDONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GI…RACE MD: $110,836 · OtherRACE MDFISHER HOUSE FOUNDATION INC: $10,836 · OtherLOAVES AND FISHES CENTERS: $10,836 · OtherSHRINERS HOSPITAL PORTLAND: $10,000 · OtherHOMER UNITED METHODIST CHURCH: $10,000 · OtherMAKE A WISH FOUNDATION OF OR: $9,516 · OtherSALVATION ARMY: $8,334 · OtherNORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT: $8,000 · OtherSETTING SCOLIOSIS STRAIGHT FOUNDATION: $10,000 · Other+9 more: $31,492 · Other+9 moreCOLUMBIA LAND TRUST: $117,900 · EnvironmentCOLUMBIA LAND TRU…NORTH OLYMPIC LAND TRUST: $18,100 · EnvironmentNORTH OLYMPIC LAN…JEFFERSON LAND TRUST: $15,000 · EnvironmentJEFFERSON LAND TR…Duwamish River Cleanup Coalition - TAG: $10,000 · EnvironmentDuwamish River Cl…+1 more: $5,000 · EnvironmentBOARD OF TRUSTEES OF WHITMAN COLLEGE: $131,000 · EducationBOARD OF TRUST…CASA LATINA: $8,000 · EducationCASA LATINAFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $131,000 · Community ImprovementFIDELITY INVE…Homer Foundation: $131,000 · Youth DevelopmentHomer Foundat…FARESTART: $16,666 · Employment
Philanthropy$262,000Other$219,850Environment$166,000Education$139,000Community Improvement$131,000Youth Development$131,000Employment$16,666

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 budgetFIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND: $131,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN ENDOWMENT FOUNDATION: $131,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBOARD OF TRUSTEES OF WHITMAN COLLEGE: $131,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHomer Foundation: $131,000 over 1y, 6.8% of budgetCOLUMBIA LAND TRUST: $117,900 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetNORTH OLYMPIC LAND TRUST: $18,100 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetFARESTART: $16,666 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetJEFFERSON LAND TRUST: $15,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetFISHER HOUSE FOUNDATION INC: $10,836 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetDuwamish River Cleanup Coalition - TAG: $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetSETTING SCOLIOSIS STRAIGHT FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetNORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT: $8,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCASA LATINA: $8,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetNorth Coast Land Conservancy Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHOMER COMMUNITY FOOD PANTRY: $5,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetSOUTH PENINSULA HAVEN HOUSE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMACDONALD CENTER: $4,164 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetClatsop Community Action: $4,164 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetNORTHWEST HARVEST EMM: $3,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetALBERTINA KERR CENTERS: $2,082 over 1y, 0.0% 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.

The Oregon Community …M J Murdock Charitabl…Seattle FoundationLand Trust Alliance I…Meyer Memorial TrustThe US Charitable Gif…The Bank of America C…Morgan Stanley Global…Donor Advised Charita…Vanguard Charitable E…National Philanthropi…American Online Givin…
The Oregon Community FoundationOR17.9× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Oregon Community Foundation · M J Murdock Charitable Trust · Seattle Foundation · Land Trust Alliance Inc · Meyer Memorial Trust · The US Charitable Gift Trust · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc

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 Arthur M James Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Arthur M James Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 26%
  • Albertina Kerr Centers: 74% of income from government
  • Clatsop Community Action: 26% of income from government
  • North Coast Land Conservancy Inc: 6% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
9report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 30 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 2020, released 2020. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Arthur M James Family’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