· Public charity
Community Action Partnership of Oregon
To magnify the impact of community action to serve low-income oregonians by advocating for resources with a unified voice, strengthening partnerships, and building capacity.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- $10k–50k1 grant · $24k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $108k
- $250k+4 grants · $2.8M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNITED COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK | $881,876 |
| COMMUNITY SERVICES CONSORTIUM | $817,976 |
| YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP | $738,748 |
| MID-COLUMBIA COMMUNITY ACTION COUNCIL | $366,560 |
| COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS OF NE OREGON | $108,472 |
| COMMUNITY IN ACTION | $24,306 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $4.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% of those 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 +108% since the first grant, against +29% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $882k 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
- KLKLAMATH & LAKE COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICES7× · 2017–2024 · $3.1M · revenue +95%
- YCYAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP9× · 2017–2025 · $2.9M · revenue +141%
- MCMid-Columbia Community Action Council9× · 2017–2025 · $2.4M · revenue +311%
Funded once
- WSWASHINGTON STATE COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIPgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $48k · revenue +159%
- CACOMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP ASSOCIATION OF IDAHO INCone grant, 2017 · $36k · revenue -99%
- RARURAL ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAMgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $36k · revenue +29%
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.
The center provides subsidized housing, weatherization services, emergency services, energy assistance and nutrition education and supplemental food to low income individuals and families in whitman county.
To provide a wide range of services in an effort to help improve the quality of life for people with an economic disadvantage.
Clatsop community action, inc. (cca) is an oregon nonprofit corporation whose mission is to assist low-income individuals and families meet housing, energy, food and other basic living needs in the clatsop county area of oregon. cca…
Our mission is to reduce the causes and adverse consequences of poverty and to empower low-income individuals, families and communities to achieve self-sufficiency through advocacy, resource utilization and service delivery.
To provide services for low income individuals, provide training to individuals seeking employment, and assist senior citizens under entitlement programs.
To assist individuals at or below the poverty line by providing resources, funding, and education.
The mission of NCCAP is to act as an advocate, provider, and facilitator of programs and services for low-income individuals in Lincoln, Marathon, and Wood Counties (WI). NCCAP seeks to create opportunities for people and communities to…
"community action of greene county (cagc) empowers disadvantaged individuals and families to grow and thrive through advocacy and person- centered services. cagc promotes collaboration to strengthen the community." cagc's services include…
To advocate for, strengthen, and coordinate all resources private, local, state, and federal that will assist us in promoting the self-sufficiency of people. a belief in basic human dignity and the exercise of free choice motivates the…
Agency provides community assistance to low income families and individuals including assistance with utility bills, home weatherization, emergency housing
The mission of community action for improvement, inc. is to build sustainable communities with partners by providing services and resources utilizing the whole family approach with low-income households to help reduce the burdens of…
Provide South Lane County community members with basic needs resources, life skills, and resources toward self-sufficiency.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Klamath & Lake Community Action Services and the most unlike its peers is United Community Action Network. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 10 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 KLAMATH & LAKE COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICES ↗
- Who funds YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds Mid-Columbia Community Action Council ↗
- Who funds UNITED COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NE OREGON INC ↗
- Who funds Community in Action ↗
- Who funds WASHINGTON STATE COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP ASSOCIATION OF IDAHO INC ↗
- Who funds RURAL ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM ↗
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 · The Roundhouse Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · The Ford Family Foundation · Amazonsmile 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 Community Action Partnership of Oregon 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.
- United Community Action Network — 82% of income from government
- Klamath & Lake Community Action Services — 77% of income from government
- Community in Action — 65% of income from government
- Yamhill Community Action Partnership — 61% of income from government
- Mid-Columbia Community Action Council — 43% of income from government
- Community Connection of Ne Oregon Inc — 1% 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.