· Private foundation
Bancroft Foundation
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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2023–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k5 grants · $6k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $120k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Rose Haven | $50,000 |
| Appalachian Trail Conservancy | $40,000 |
| Forest Park Conservancy | $20,000 |
| Pacific Crest Trail Association | $20,000 |
| The Pixie Project | $20,000 |
| Crested Butte Mountain bike association | $10,000 |
| Willamette Riverkeeper | $10,000 |
| Hoffman Institute Foundat | $3,000 |
| University of Virginia | $1,000 |
| Virginia Maryland School of Veterinary Medicine | $1,000 |
| Ultimate Impact Inc | $500 |
| Path Home Family Village | $500 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY23–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 98% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +41% since the first grant, against +8% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2024, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $82k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
ROSE HAVEN CIC2× · 2023–2024 · $100k · revenue +41%- PPPixie Project Inc2× · 2023–2024 · $50k · revenue +10%
- TFTHE FOREST PARK CONSERVANCY2× · 2023–2024 · $30k · revenue +20%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2023 · $30k
BIRD ALLIANCE OF OREGON INCone grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -16%
Friends of the Columbia Gorgeone grant, 2023 · $5k · revenue -27%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.
Western rivers conservancy's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states. continued on schedule o.we acquire land to conserve critical habitat, provide public access for compatible use and enjoyment, and…
Washington trails association is on a mission to connect everyone to the outdoors and build a community that gives back to trails and public lands.
The Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council is a local nonprofit organization that strives to enhance and restore habitat for fish and wildlife our community and for future generations. Our Board of Directors consists of seven members with…
Preserve in perpetuity the natural habitats, rural landscapes, and open spaces of the great peninsula of washington's puget sound.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
Wfpa advocates and advnances sustainable forestry in washington to protect and enhance the economic investment of private working forest landowners.
Sierra watch secures conservation outcomes to protect the natural resources, mountain communities, and timeless values of the tahoe sierra.
Protecting our shrub-steppe and connecting people to this vanishing landscape.
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.…
The mission of the parks foundation of clark county is to improve the quality of life in clark county by supporting parks, trails, and recreational programs.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Hawaii Community Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Crested Butte Mountain Bike Association. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
16 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 16 of the 20 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds ROSE HAVEN CIC ↗
- Who funds Pixie Project Inc ↗
- Who funds APPALACHIAN TRAIL CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds THE FOREST PARK CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC CREST TRAIL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds CRESTED BUTTE MOUNTAIN BIKE ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds WILLAMETTE RIVERKEEPER ↗
- Who funds BIRD ALLIANCE OF OREGON INC ↗
- Who funds Friends of the Columbia Gorge ↗
- Who funds HAWAII COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds HOFFMAN INSTITUTE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Alices Kids Inc ↗
- Who funds VIRGINIA TECH FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Oregon Parks Forever ↗
- Who funds PATH HOME ↗
- Who funds Ultimate Impact Inc ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: The Oregon Community Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · Texas Instruments Foundation · D27 Foundation · Rose E Tucker Charitable Trust · The Jackson Foundation · Oregon Jewish Community Foundation · The Bullitt Foundation · Deacon Charitable Foundation · The Collins Foundation · Hillman Family Foundations · Ibm International Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Bancroft Foundation funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Willamette Riverkeeper — 42% of income from government
- Bird Alliance of Oregon Inc — 0% of income from government
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Bancroft Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Bancroft Foundation 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.