Skip to content
Community Action Partnership of Oregon at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· 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.

$2.9M
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$882k
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, FY2017 to 2025.

Community Improvement$11MHuman Services$2.6MPhilanthropy$636k
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $24k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $108k
  • $250k+4 grants · $2.8M
$738,748
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
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
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 (FY17–25, $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 its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $739k → 11%COMMUNITY CONNECTIONS OF NE OREGON: $108k → 15%UNITED COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK: $882k → 17%YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $505k → 11%COMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NORTHEAST OREGON: $101k → 15%YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $446k → 11%COMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NORTHEAST OREGON: $82k → 15%YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $332k → 11%COMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NORTHEAST OREGON: $76k → 15%YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $229k → 11%COMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NORTHEAST OREGON: $71k → 15%YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $167k → 11%COMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NORTHEAST OREGON: $70k → 15%YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $163k → 11%COMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NORTHEAST OREGON: $70k → 15%YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $154k → 11%COMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NORTHEAST OREGON: $49k → 15%YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $146k → 11%COMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NORTHEAST OREGON: $46k → 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 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.
$13M · 6 repeat orgs$1.0M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +108% since the first grant, against +22% for those 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

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

6
3

Total granted

$13M
$120k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+108%
+22%

Still filing today

83%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $882k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Community ImprovementHuman ServicesPhilanthropyOther
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

  • KL
    KLAMATH & LAKE COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICES
    7× · 2017–2024 · $3.1M · revenue +95%
  • YC
    YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.9M · revenue +141%
  • MC
    Mid-Columbia Community Action Council
    9× · 2017–2025 · $2.4M · revenue +311%

Funded once

  • WS
    WASHINGTON STATE COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIPgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $48k · revenue +145%
  • CA
    COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP ASSOCIATION OF IDAHO INC
    one grant, 2017 · $36k · revenue -99%
  • RA
    RURAL ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM
    one grant, 2017 · $36k · revenue +22%
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
Community Action Agency of Northwest Alabama Inc

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.

—
2
South Central Community Action Partnership Inc

To provide a wide range of services in an effort to help improve the quality of life for people with an economic disadvantage.

—
3
Clatsop Community Action

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…

—
4
Community Action Center

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.

Human Services
5
Lower Columbia Community Action Council

To provide services for low income individuals, provide training to individuals seeking employment, and assist senior citizens under entitlement programs.

Human Services
6
Community Action of Greene County Inc

"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…

—
7
Western Maine Community Action Inc

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…

Human Services
8
Community Action Agency of Northeast Alabama Inc

To assist individuals at or below the poverty line by providing resources, funding, and education.

Human Services
9
Dakota Prairie Community Action Agency Inc

Dakota prairie community action agency, inc was formed to provide advocacy, programs, and services to address the issues of poverty and improve economic self-sufficiency for all households in a six-county area in north dakota. areas of…

Human Services
10
Community Action of Southern Kentucky Inc

We team with Community partners to provide human services with dignity and respect, empowering people in Southern Kentucky to achieve stability and economic security.

—
11
North Central Community Action Program Inc

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 Improvement
12
Chelan-Douglas Community Action Cou

The mission of chelan douglas community action council is to end poverty by empowering people and improving lives.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Klamath & Lake Community Action Services; the most unlike its peers is Community in Action. 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

9 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. 9 of the 10 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
7/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMUNITY SERVICES CONSORTIUM: $3,394,313 · OtherCOMMUNITY SERVICES CONSORTIUMMid-Columbia Community Action Council: $2,436,739 · OtherMid-Columbia Community Action Council+1 more: $36,469 · OtherYAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $2,878,863 · Human ServicesYAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHI…UNITED COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK: $881,876 · Human ServicesUNITED COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORKCOMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NE OREGON INC: $673,127 · Human ServicesCOMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NE OREGON I…KLAMATH & LAKE COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICES: $3,131,039 · Community ImprovementKLAMATH & LAKE COMMUNITY …+2 more: $83,961 · Community ImprovementCommunity in Action: $635,974 · Philanthropy
Other$5,867,521Human Services$4,433,866Community Improvement$3,215,000Philanthropy$635,974

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

25%50%75%100%$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetKLAMATH & LAKE COMMUNITY ACTION SERVICES: $3,131,039 over 7y, 12% of budgetYAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $2,878,863 over 9y, 4.7% of budgetMid-Columbia Community Action Council: $2,436,739 over 9y, 8.7% of budgetUNITED COMMUNITY ACTION NETWORK: $881,876 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetCOMMUNITY CONNECTION OF NE OREGON INC: $673,127 over 9y, 1.1% of budgetCommunity in Action: $635,974 over 9y, 4.3% of budgetWASHINGTON STATE COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP: $47,646 over 1y, 5.6% of budgetCOMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP ASSOCIATION OF IDAHO INC: $36,469 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetRURAL ALASKA COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAM: $36,315 over 1y, 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.

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 …The Roundhouse Founda…Meyer Memorial TrustThe Ford Family Found…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Oregon Community FoundationOR16.6× affinity6 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Oregon Community Foundation · The Roundhouse Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · The Ford Family Foundation · Amazonsmile 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 Partnership of Oregon funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Community Action Partnership of Oregon. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 65%
  • 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
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
4rely 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 10 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Community Action Partnership of Oregon’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