Skip to content
Erath Family Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Private foundation

Erath Family Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$311k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
3
States reached
$200k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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.

Food & Nutrition$918kEducation$281kRecreation & Sports$243kHousing & Shelter$32kReligion$24kHealth$19kPublic Safety & Disaster$15kArts & Culture$14kOther$0
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $25k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $276k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$16M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
JACKSON COUNTY 4-H MASTER GARDENER AND AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE CNT$200,000
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY$75,556
UNION GOSPEL MISSION$10,000
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN$5,000
NATIONAL GRAPE RESEARCH ALLIANCE$5,000
A FAMILY PLACE$5,000
DOUGLAS HIGH SCHOOL$5,000
AHIVOY$2,000
CANBY CENTER$1,500
YAMHILL COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP (YCAP)$1,500
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 (FY18–25, $12k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 83% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%LUTHERAN COMMUNITY SERVICES NORTHWEST: $2k → 9%A FAMILY PLACE: $5k → 11%A FAMILY PLACE: $2k → 11%A FAMILY PLACE: $2k → 11%A FAMILY PLACE: $1k → 11%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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.2M · 16 repeat orgs$332k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +23% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

16 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
10

Total granted

$1.2M
$124k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
+13%

Still filing today

69%
70%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 33% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $208k 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
EducationHealthCommunity ImprovementArts & CultureRecreation & SportsFood & NutritionOther
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

  • AR
    Agricultural Research Foundation
    9× · 2017–2025 · $860k · revenue +10%
  • LU
    Linfield University
    5× · 2017–2022 · $69k · revenue +3%
  • WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC
    6× · 2020–2025 · $15k · revenue +21%

Funded once

  • WV
    WILLAMETTE VALLEY WINERIES ASSOCIATION
    one grant, 2024 · $40k · revenue 0%
  • FF
    FUTURE FARMERS OF AMERICA STATE ASSOCIATIONS & LOCAL CHAPTER
    one grant, 2018 · $30k
  • WV
    WILLAMETTE VALLEY WINE FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $30k · revenue +132% · 25% of their budget
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
Oregon Restaurant and Lodging Association

Orla serves as the leading industry advocate, striving to protect, improve and promote oregon hospitality.

—
2
Oregon Agricultural Trust

Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.

Environment
3
Oregon Research Institute

Oregon research institute is an independent behavioral sciences research center dedicated to understanding human behavior and improving the quality of human life through the prevention and treatment of health, educational, and social…

Social Science
4
The Water Research Foundation

The purpose of the water research foundation (wrf) is a definitive research organization to advance the science of all things water to better meet the evolving needs of its subscribers and the water sector. to engage exclusively in…

Environment
5
Life Science Washington

Life science washington is a non-profit trade and professional association dedicated to promoting innovation and responsible growth in the life sciences and biomedical industries in the state of washington. promotion and education are…

—
6
Technology Association of Oregon

To support our members and promote the growth and quality of oregon's technology industry by providing opportunities for business and professional development through networking and informational programs.

—
7
Oregon Journalism Project

Oregon journalism project's mission is to inform, engage, and empower oregonians with the kind of data-driven and solution-seeking investigative reporting that makes a significant impact at the state and local levels - serving no agenda…

Arts & Culture
8
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health

Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…

Health
9
World Affairs Council of Oregon dba WorldOregon

The mission of WorldOregon is to engage Oregonians with the world and broaden public awareness and understanding of international affairs.

International
10
Washington Filmworks

To build and enhance the competitiveness of Washington State's film and associated creative industry. We accomplish this by marketing and managing the state's production incentive program, representing the state in national and…

Community Improvement
11
Association of Washington Cities

The association of washington cities builds connections between our state's diverse cities and towns, while providing our members with the support needed to thrive through delivery of data-driven education, nationally recognized pooling…

—
12
Western University of Health Sciences

To produce, in a humanistic tradition, health care professionals and biomedical knowledge that will enhance and extend the quality of life in our communities.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Immigration Law Center; the most unlike its peers is Friends of Yamhelas Westsider Trail. 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

21 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. 21 of the 30 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
20/21
Grantees still filing
17/21
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Agricultural Research Foundation: $859,860 · OtherAgricultural Research FoundationJACKSON COUNTY 4-H MASTER GARDENER AND AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE CNT: $200,000 · OtherJACKSON COUNTY 4-H MASTER GARDENER AND AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE CNT+17 more: $154,000 · Other+17 moreOregon State University Foundation: $200,000 · EducationOregon State Univers…Linfield University: $69,000 · EducationLinfield UniversityAHIVOY: $10,000 · EducationWILLAMETTE VALLEY WINE FOUNDATION: $30,000 · Community ImprovementTHE CONTINGENT: $6,000 · Community ImprovementWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $15,000 · InternationalKapi'olani Health Foundation: $9,000 · HealthALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $4,000 · HealthCaringBridge: $2,000 · HealthLutheran Community Services Northwest: $12,000 · Human ServicesOREGON PUBLIC BROADCASTING: $10,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$1,213,860Education$279,000Community Improvement$36,000International$15,000Health$15,000Human Services$12,000Arts & Culture$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 budgetAgricultural Research Foundation: $859,860 over 9y, 1.4% of budgetOregon State University Foundation: $200,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetLinfield University: $69,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetWILLAMETTE VALLEY WINERIES ASSOCIATION: $40,000 over 1y, 2.0% of budgetWILLAMETTE VALLEY WINE FOUNDATION: $30,000 over 1y, 25% of budgetWORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC: $15,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetLutheran Community Services Northwest: $12,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetOREGON PUBLIC BROADCASTING: $10,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetAHIVOY: $10,000 over 5y, 2.6% of budgetKapi'olani Health Foundation: $9,000 over 4y, 0.0% of budgetWALK IN THE PARK FOUNDATION: $6,000 over 3y, 4.6% of budgetTHE CONTINGENT: $6,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC: $4,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCaringBridge: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetNATIONAL IMMIGRATION LAW CENTER: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetREACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 …Juan Young TrustMarie Lamfrom Charita…M J Murdock Charitabl…Donor Advised Charita…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Oregon Community FoundationOR20.1× affinity8 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Oregon Community Foundation · Juan Young Trust · Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation Trust · M J Murdock Charitable Trust · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Erath Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Erath Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%2%8%17%30%funder's share of their income ↑0%8%15%22%30%share of the org’s income from government →median 5%
  • Ahivoy: 29% of income from government
  • Reach Community Development Inc: 18% of income from government
  • Literary Arts Inc: 10% of income from government
  • The Contingent: 5% of income from government
  • Linfield University: 4% of income from government
  • Oregon Public Broadcasting: 1% of income from government
  • Oregon State University Foundation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
3report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–30%
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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Erath Family Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Erath Family Foundation through trustees and officers whose names appear on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the shortest route it can evidence.

Each link is a name appearing on two organizations’ public IRS 990 filings, matched on that name and, where the filings support it, on location. A same-state match has geographic support, which is a second matching feature rather than confirmation that the two are one person; a cross-state one is the likeliest to be two people who share a name. Every hop shows its tier, low-confidence and distant paths are held back rather than guessed, and it is worth confirming the person before you use the introduction.

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 30 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-PF 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 Erath Family’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