Skip to content
Community Action Council of Lewis Mason & Thurston Counties at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Community Action Council of Lewis Mason & Thurston Counties

The community action council is a nonprofit agency committed to improving the quality of life for those in our community by helping meet the basic needs of housing, heating, safety, mental health, food and nutrition for families and individuals and to lessen the impact of poverty.

$11M
Granted FY2023
13
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$67k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its 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, FY2021 to 2023.

Food & Nutrition$826k
02FY2023 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $249,784, the rows itemized in this filing. The $11,022,327 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $10,772,543 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2023

  • Under $10k8 grants · $27k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $42k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $181k
$6,697
Median grant
1
States reached
$18M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THURSTON COUNTY FOOD BANK$67,288
THE SAINTS' PANTRY$59,547
HOOD CANAL FOOD BANK$53,989
YELM COMMUNITY SERVICES$30,939
NORTH MASON FOOD BANK$11,089
MATLOCK COMMUNITY CHURCH$8,459
NORTH KITSAP FISHLINE$6,697
BREMERTON FOODLINE$6,161
LEWIS COUNTY FOOD BANK COALITION$2,295
BRIDGE COMMUNITY CHURCH (PIONEER FOOD BANK)$1,587
WINLOCK-VADER FOOD BANK$867
LEWIS COUNTY GOSPEL MISSION$762
SPIRIT OF LIFE LUTHERAN CHURCH (LIFECARE COMMUNITY FOOD BANK)$104
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 (FY21–23, $120k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 7% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%YELM COMMUNITY SERVICES: $31k → 9%YELM COMMUNITY SERVICES: $31k → 9%SOUTH KITSAP HELPLINE: $5k → 10%YELM COMMUNITY SERVICES: $17k → 9%NORTH KITSAP FISHLINE: $13k → 10%WINLOCK-VADER FOOD BANK: $8k → 12%NORTH KITSAP FISHLINE: $7k → 10%WINLOCK-VADER FOOD BANK: $867 → 12%NORTH KITSAP FISHLINE: $7k → 10%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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

93%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$771k · 11 repeat orgs$55k to everyone else

11 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2023, 0 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
4

Total granted

$771k
$52k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+102%

Still filing today

82%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23
Food & NutritionHuman ServicesReligionOther
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

  • TC
    THURSTON COUNTY FOOD BANK
    7× · 2017–2023 · $320k · revenue +118%
  • TS
    THE SAINT'S PANTRY FOOD BANK
    9× · 2017–2025 · $119k · revenue ×12
  • HC
    Hood Canal Food Bank
    9× · 2017–2025 · $115k · revenue +50% · 67% of their budget

Funded once

  • SF
    Sharenet Food Bankgraduated
    3× · 2021–2023 · $39k · revenue +110%
  • SV
    SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL CONFERENCE OF OUR LADY STARgraduated
    7× · 2017–2023 · $7k · revenue +41%
  • SK
    SOUTH KITSAP HELPLINEgraduated
    7× · 2017–2023 · $5k · revenue +102%
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
Snohomish Community Food Bank

To provide food and services in a caring and dignified manner to neighbors in need

—
2
Lake Chelan Food Bank

The mission of Lake Chelan Food Bank is to treat each person we serve with dignity and respect and to provide balanced and varied options that give each person the liberty to meet the specific food needs for themsevles and/or their family.

Food & Nutrition
3
West Seattle Food Bank

West Seattle Food Bank strengthens the community through the power of neighbors helping neighbors, working to ensure all in our community have access to the essential necessities of living.

Food & Nutrition
4
Washington County Food Bank Inc

Food distribution to needy individuals and families.

Food & Nutrition
5
Nooksack Valley Food Bank Association

Our mission is to provide a variety of food products to families and individuals who are in need. We are open one day a week.

Food & Nutrition
6
Hoquiam Food and Clothing Bank

To provide food and clothing assistance to person in need.

Health
7
South Corvallis Food Bank

Increase sustainable food security in South Corvallis by providing emergency food and supplies.

Food & Nutrition
8
Port Angeles Food Bank

Nourishing our community. the port angeles food bank is the main food bank in clallam county, providing food to 13 other area pantries and meal programs as well as providing food to over 5,000 individuals per month.

Food & Nutrition
9
Sequim Food Bank

To provide food and assistance to individuals and organizations within our community so that "no one goes hungry in Sequim".Our 5 core values that guide our work:1. Compassion and Respect: Turn no one away from services and always…

—
10
Siskiyou Community Food Bank

We provided free healthy food to low-income families and individuals in need.

Food & Nutrition
11
Storehouse Food Bank

Serving our community with healthy food and care.

Food & Nutrition
12
Friday Harbor Food Bank

Collection and distribution of food for needy families

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is North Kitsap Fishline; the most unlike its peers is Lewis County Food Bank Coalition. 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

19 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.

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

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
16/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

THURSTON COUNTY FOOD BANK: $320,423 · Food & NutritionTHURSTON COUNTY FOOD BANKTHE SAINT'S PANTRY FOOD BANK: $119,094 · Food & NutritionTHE SAINT'S PANTRY FOOD BANKSharenet Food Bank: $39,401 · Food & NutritionSharenet Food BankNORTH MASON FOOD BANK: $30,021 · Food & NutritionNORTH MASON FOOD BANKHood Canal Food Bank: $114,989 · OtherHood Canal Food BankBremerton Foodline: $28,450 · OtherBremerton FoodlineMATLOCK COMMUNITY CHURCH: $26,565 · OtherMATLOCK COMMUNITY CHURCHSPIRIT OF LIFE LUTHERAN CHURCH: $9,361 · OtherLEWIS COUNTY FOOD BANK COALITION: $7,700 · Other+2 more: $2,171 · OtherYELM COMMUNITY SERVICES: $79,138 · Human ServicesYELM COMMUNITY S…NORTH KITSAP FISHLINE: $26,482 · Human ServicesNORTH KITSAP FIS…Winlock-Vader Food Bank: $8,947 · Human ServicesWinlock-Vader Fo…SOUTH KITSAP HELPLINE: $5,129 · Human ServicesSAINT VINCENT DE PAUL CONFERENCE OF OUR LADY STAR: $7,203 · ReligionLEWIS COUNTY GOSPEL MISSION: $762 · Religion
Food & Nutrition$508,939Other$189,236Human Services$119,696Religion$7,965

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHURSTON COUNTY FOOD BANK: $320,423 over 7y, 1.2% of budgetTHE SAINT'S PANTRY FOOD BANK: $119,094 over 9y, 3.2% of budgetHood Canal Food Bank: $114,989 over 9y, 67% of budgetYELM COMMUNITY SERVICES: $79,138 over 7y, 0.9% of budgetSharenet Food Bank: $39,401 over 3y, 7.0% of budgetNORTH MASON FOOD BANK: $30,021 over 9y, 2.4% of budgetBremerton Foodline: $28,450 over 7y, 1.0% of budgetNORTH KITSAP FISHLINE: $26,482 over 3y, 0.3% of budgetWinlock-Vader Food Bank: $8,947 over 3y, 5.1% of budgetLEWIS COUNTY FOOD BANK COALITION: $7,700 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetSAINT VINCENT DE PAUL CONFERENCE OF OUR LADY STAR: $7,203 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetSOUTH KITSAP HELPLINE: $5,129 over 7y, 0.2% of budgetLEWIS COUNTY GOSPEL MISSION: $762 over 6y, 0.1% 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.

  • Who funds THURSTON COUNTY FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds THE SAINT'S PANTRY FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds Hood Canal Food Bank ↗
  • Who funds YELM COMMUNITY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds Sharenet Food Bank ↗
  • Who funds NORTH MASON FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds Bremerton Foodline ↗
  • Who funds NORTH KITSAP FISHLINE ↗
  • Who funds Winlock-Vader Food Bank ↗
  • Who funds LEWIS COUNTY FOOD BANK COALITION ↗
  • Who funds SAINT VINCENT DE PAUL CONFERENCE OF OUR LADY STAR ↗
  • Who funds SOUTH KITSAP HELPLINE ↗
  • Who funds LEWIS COUNTY GOSPEL MISSION ↗

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.

Food LifelineNorthwest Harvest EmmPuget Sound Energy Fo…Kitsap Community Foun…The Community Foundat…Kitsap Credit UnionFirst Fed FoundationCoastal HarvestUnited Way of Kitsap …Fred H & Mary S Dore …The Norcliffe Foundat…Give Back Foundation
Food LifelineWA50.6× affinity22 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Food Lifeline · Northwest Harvest Emm · Puget Sound Energy Foundation · Kitsap Community Foundation · The Community Foundation of South Puget Sound · Kitsap Credit Union · First Fed Foundation · Coastal Harvest · United Way of Kitsap County · Fred H & Mary S Dore Charitable Foundation · The Norcliffe Foundation · Give Back Foundation

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 Community Action Council of Lewis Mason & Thurston Counties funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Community Action Council of Lewis Mason & Thurston Counties. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%5%19%42%75%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    10report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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 17 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $12M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2023, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Community Action Council of Lewis Mason & Thurston 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