Skip to content
Elevate Oregon at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Elevate Oregon

Elevating potential, building sustained relationships with urban youth, and charting paths to brighter futures.

$189k
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$35k
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, FY2022 to 2025.

Youth Development$100kCommunity Improvement$93kRecreation & Sports$50kHealth$35kEnvironment$27kFood & Nutrition$25kHousing & Shelter$25kHuman Services$21kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $147,264, the rows itemized in this filing. The $188,586 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $41,322 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.
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MENTAL HEALTH & ADDICTION OF OREGON$35,000
COLUMBIA SLOUGH WATERSHED COUNCIL$27,264
PROJECT 48 INC$25,000
ECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON$25,000
FRIENDS OF BASEBALL$25,000
THE PATHFINDERS NETWORK$10,000
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 (FY23–25, $71k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%MARIE LAMFROM FOUNDATION: $21k → 8%PROJECT 48 INC: $25k → 12%PROJECT 48 INC: $25k → 12%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
Oregon Youth Outreach

Introduce at-risk youth to outdoor activities

—
2
Rogue Farm Corps Dba Oregon Farm Corps

Oregon farm corps trains and equips the next generation of regenerative farmers and rancers through hands-on skill building, education, and business support.

Environment
3
Ywca of Greater Portland

To eliminate racism, empower women and promote peace, justice, freedom and dignity for all.

Human Services
4
Oregon Washington Health Network

Integrating physical, mental, behavioral, and public health services to improve health outcomes and health equity focusing on access, quality and cost effectiveness.

Philanthropy
5
Urban League of Portland Inc

To help empower african americans and others achieve equality in education, employment, and economic security.

Human Services
6
Earth Day Oregon
—
7
Oregon Websites and Watershed Project Inc

Develop educational network to communicate historical and scientific information empasizing natural and cultural resources to pacific northwest.

Environment
8
Portland Trails

Over the next five years, portland trails will work to transform greater portland into a regional hub of connectivity and sustainability. by facilitating the expansion and enhancement of our trail network, we will foster inclusive…

Environment
9
Onward Roseburg

Homeless services

—
10
Parenting With Intent

Building strong connections for healthy communities through mental health programs, youth empowerment services and family services.

Human Services
11
Cultivate Initiatives

The organization collectively works alongside those on the margins to empower individuals and communities through an inclusive range of services and support in east portland.

Housing & Shelter
12
Arbor House Portland

Recovery housing and services

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Project 48 Inc; the most unlike its peers is Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation Trust. 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 11 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
3
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
4/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

NIKEINC: $130,000 · OtherNIKEINCMental Health Association of Oregon: $35,000 · OtherMental Health Association of OregonECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGON: $25,000 · OtherECUMENICAL MINISTRIES OF OREGONThe Waterstrong Initiative: $12,582 · OtherThe Waterstrong InitiativePROJECT 48 INC: $50,000 · Human ServicesPROJECT 48 INCMARIE LAMFROM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION TRUST: $21,000 · Human ServicesMARIE LAMFROM CHARIT…URBAN NATURE PARTNERS PDX: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentURBAN NATURE P…FRIENDS OF BASEBALL: $25,000 · Youth DevelopmentFRIENDS OF BAS…COLUMBIA SLOUGH WATERSHED COUNCIL INC: $27,264 · EnvironmentROSE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORAT: $24,972 · Housing & ShelterPathfinders of Oregon: $10,000 · Crime & Legal
Other$202,582Human Services$71,000Youth Development$50,000Environment$27,264Housing & Shelter$24,972Crime & Legal$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPROJECT 48 INC: $50,000 over 2y, 4.0% of budgetMental Health Association of Oregon: $35,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCOLUMBIA SLOUGH WATERSHED COUNCIL INC: $27,264 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetURBAN NATURE PARTNERS PDX: $25,000 over 1y, 17% of budgetROSE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORAT: $24,972 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetMARIE LAMFROM CHARITABLE FOUNDATION TRUST: $21,000 over 1y, 3.1% of budgetThe Waterstrong Initiative: $12,582 over 1y, 25% of budgetPathfinders of Oregon: $10,000 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 Collins FoundationJuan Young TrustMarie Lamfrom Charita…Worksystems IncThe Harold & Arlene S…Meyer Memorial TrustThe Autzen FoundationAmerican Online Givin…Amazonsmile Foundation
The Oregon Community FoundationOR20.3× affinity8 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Oregon Community Foundation · The Collins Foundation · Juan Young Trust · Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation Trust · Worksystems Inc · The Harold & Arlene Schnitzer Care Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · The Autzen Foundation · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · 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 Elevate Oregon funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Elevate Oregon. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 23%
  • Pathfinders of Oregon: 57% of income from government
  • Mental Health Association of Oregon: 41% of income from government
  • Urban Nature Partners Pdx: 34% of income from government
  • Project 48 Inc: 23% of income from government
  • Columbia Slough Watershed Council Inc: 11% of income from government
  • The Waterstrong Initiative: 3% of income from government
  • Rose Community Development Corporat: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 11 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 Elevate 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