Skip to content
Boys & Girls Club of Salem Marion & Polk Counties at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Boys & Girls Club of Salem Marion & Polk Counties

To inspire and enable all youth grades 1-12, especially those who need us most, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens through the development of a positive self-image and self-reliance.

$2.8M
Granted FY2022
1
Grants FY2022
1
States reached
$2.8M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2022.

Youth Development$3.3MHuman Services$3.1M
02FY2022 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$2,775,592
Median grant
1
States reached
$15M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SALEM MARION & POLK COUNTIES FOUNDATION$2,775,592
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 (FY20–22) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 94% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF BEND: $344k → 10%BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF PORTLAND METROPOLITAN AREA: $743k → 12%BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF ALBANY: $333k → 13%BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SALEM MARION & POLK COUNTIES FOUNDATION: $2.8M → 14%BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF WESTERN LANE COUNTY: $176k → 15%BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE UMPQUA VALLEY: $271k → 17%BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CORVALLIS: $324k → 18%BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE ROGUE VALLEY: $381k → 18%BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF WESTERN TREASURE VALLEY: $201k → 20%BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE GREATER SANTIAM: $546k → 13%BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF EMERALD VALLEY: $146k → 15%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.
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 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
Boys Girls Club
—
2
Boys and Girls Clubs of West Central Missouri

The mission of the boys & girls clubs of west central missouri is to inspire and enable all young people to realize their full potential as caring and productive citizens.

Youth Development
3
Boys & Girls Club of the Missouri River Area

To enable all young people, especially those who need them most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens.

Youth Development
4
Boys and Girls Club of Augusta/Waynesboro

To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring and responsible citizens.

Youth Development
5
Boys and Girls Club of Glacier Country

To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens.

Youth Development
6
Boys & Girls Clubs of the San Gorgonio Pass

To inspire and enable all young people especially those in need to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens.

Education
7
Boys & Girls Club of Meriden Inc

Provide opportunities for positive and healthy growth for youth in our communities.

Youth Development
8
Boys & Girls Club of Greater Billerica Inc

To enable all young people, especially those that need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, and responsible citizens.

Youth Development
9
Boys & Girls Club of the Greater West Plains Area

To inspire and enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive and caring citizens.

Youth Development
10
Boys & Girls Clubs of the North Valley

To inspire and enable all young people to reach their full potential as caring, productive, and responsible citizens.

Youth Development
11
Boys and Girls Club of Carroll County Inc

To inspire and enable all youth to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens.

Youth Development
12
Boys & Girls Clubs of Cumberland County

To provide mentoring programs for at risk youth with educational and recreational opportunities that they normally may not be able to experience.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Boys and Girls Club of Sw Oregon; the most unlike its peers is Boys and Girls Clubs of Portland Metropolitan Area. 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

12 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF PORTLAND METROPOLITAN AREA: $743,164 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF PORTLAND METROPOLITAN AREABOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE GREATER SANTIAM: $546,062 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE GREATER SANTIAMBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE ROGUE VALLEY: $381,231 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE ROGUE VALLEYBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF BEND INC: $344,379 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF BEND INCBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF ALBANY: $332,763 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF ALBANYBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CORVALLIS INC: $324,000 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CORVALLIS INCBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF WESTERN TREASURE VALLEY: $201,043 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF WESTERN TREASURE VALLEYBoys & Girls Club of Western Lane County: $175,972 · Youth DevelopmentBoys & Girls Club of Western Lane CountyBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF EMERALD VALLEY: $145,894 · Youth DevelopmentBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SALEM MARION & POLK COUNTIES FOUNDATION: $2,775,592 · OtherBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SALEM MARION & POLK COUNTIES FO…BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SW OREGON: $195,701 · OtherBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SW OREGONBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE UMPQUA VALLEY INC: $270,843 · Recreation & Sports
Youth Development$3,194,508Other$2,971,293Recreation & Sports$270,843

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%grantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF SALEM MARION & POLK COUNTIES FOUNDATION: $2,775,592 over 1y, 89% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF PORTLAND METROPOLITAN AREA: $743,164 over 1y, 17% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE GREATER SANTIAM: $546,062 over 1y, 23% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE ROGUE VALLEY: $381,231 over 1y, 16% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF BEND INC: $344,379 over 1y, 17% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF ALBANY: $332,763 over 1y, 15% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CORVALLIS INC: $324,000 over 1y, 7.8% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE UMPQUA VALLEY INC: $270,843 over 1y, 18% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF WESTERN TREASURE VALLEY: $201,043 over 1y, 20% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF SW OREGON: $195,701 over 1y, 14% of budgetBoys & Girls Club of Western Lane County: $175,972 over 1y, 23% of budgetBOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF EMERALD VALLEY: $145,894 over 1y, 14% 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.

Boys & Girls Clubs of…The Oregon Community …M J Murdock Charitabl…The Autzen FoundationThe Ford Family Found…Umpqua Bank Charitabl…Dutch Bros FoundationFirst Interstate Banc…Braemar Charitable Tr…The Roundhouse Founda…Dick's Sporting Goods…Good360
Boys & Girls Clubs of AmericaGA27.9× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Boys & Girls Clubs of America · The Oregon Community Foundation · M J Murdock Charitable Trust · The Autzen Foundation · The Ford Family Foundation · Umpqua Bank Charitable Foundation · Dutch Bros Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Braemar Charitable Trust · The Roundhouse Foundation · Dick's Sporting Goods Foundation · Good360

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 Boys & Girls Club of Salem Marion & Polk Counties funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Boys & Girls Club of Salem Marion & Polk Counties. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 30%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →median 15%
  • Boys and Girls Clubs of Bend Inc: 16% of income from government
  • Boys & Girls Club of Corvallis Inc: 16% of income from government
  • Boys and Girls Clubs of Emerald Valley: 15% of income from government
  • Boys & Girls Clubs of the Greater Santiam: 14% of income from government
  • Boys & Girls Club of Albany: 7% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
3get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
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 12 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2022, released 2022. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2024) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2022, the most recent year this funder made grants.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Boys & Girls Club of Salem Marion & Polk Counties’ 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