· Private foundation
Harbourton Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- $10k–50k2 grants · $65k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| METANOIA PROPERTIES LTD OF SOUTH AFRICA METANOIA | $74,929 |
| BIOLA (ISF SPIRITUAL MINISTRY) | $40,000 |
| CHILD HOUSES USA | $25,000 |
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 (FY21–23, $1.3M) land where the poverty rate runs at 7%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 5% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 11% of Harbourton Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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.
9 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 9 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $140k 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
ISLES INC2× · 2021–2022 · $80k · revenue +31%- FOFRIENDS OF ZENGER FARM2× · 2021–2022 · $55k · revenue +69%
WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC2× · 2021–2022 · $30k · revenue +167%
Funded once
- FCFIDELITY CHARITABLE GIFT FUND-HARBOURTON FOUNDATIONone grant, 2022 · $2.5M
- PSPIPER SUTTON FOUNDATION INCone grant, 2022 · $1.5M · 100% of their budget
Woodwell Climate Research Center Incone grant, 2021 · $200k · revenue +24%
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.
Food forward fights hunger and prevents food waste by rescuing fresh surplus produce, connecting this abundance with people experiencing food insecurity, and inspiring others to do the same.
The organization's mission is to increase the quantity of high quality food commodities donated to the oregon food bank network through a partnership of farmers, food processors, the oregon food bank network and the public.
To nourish the world's hungry through uniting and advancing food banks.
Zero foodprint is mobilizing the food world around agricultural climate solutions. our work aims to create a circular economy that incentivizes practices that actively draw down carbon dioxide and offer our best hope of addressing the…
Accelerate the transformation to a healthy, sustainable and equitable food system.
Food Rescue - The Organization rescues excess fresh food from Bay Area businesses, schools and non-profits and immediately delivers the food to safety net partners - such as senior housing centers, after-school programs, and homeless…
Oregon tilth is a leading nonprofit certifier, educator and advocate for sustainable organic agriculture and products since 1974. the organizations mission to make the food system and agriculture biologically sound and socially equitable…
Improve the food value chain in developing countries by mobilizing corporate volunteers to share knowledge and expertise with small and growing food processors.
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
For over 60 years, counterpart international has partnered with communities worldwide to turn local ideas into lasting solutions, connecting local vision with global opportunity. (continued on schedule o)we believe people closest to the…
We nurture connections between people,nature,and food by ensuring access to garden space and farmland, and providing education and mentoring on regenerative and sustainable agricultural practices.
On a mission to connect every person facing hunger with nutritious meals by maximizing food rescue. through direct service and community partnerships, feeding san diego provides more than 26 million meals each year to children, families,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mindful Philanthropy Inc and the most unlike its peers is The Manav Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 24 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 25% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
48 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. 48 of the 63 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 PIPER SUTTON FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds ZEPHYR IMPACT ↗
- Who funds Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc ↗
- Who funds NICHOLS SCHOOL OF BUFFALO ↗
- Who funds OPERATION SMILE INC ↗
- Who funds OUTSIDE THE BOWL ↗
- Who funds ISLES INC ↗
- Who funds REFED INC ↗
- Who funds Central City Concern ↗
- Who funds Mindful Life Project ↗
- Who funds ROUNDUP RIVER RANCH ↗
- Who funds HOMEFRONT INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF ZENGER FARM ↗
- Who funds ECOTRUST ↗
- Who funds IMPACTASSETSINC ↗
- Who funds CENTURION MINISTRIES INC ↗
- Who funds OREGON FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds ULTIMATE HAWAIIAN TRAIL RUN FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds CLUB DUST ↗
- Who funds FOOD RECOVERY NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds OUR VILLAGE GARDENS ↗
- Who funds Growing Gardens ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds URBAN GLEANERS ↗
- Who funds Mercy Corps ↗
- Who funds RESPERO MINISTRIES ↗
- Who funds ROGUE FARM CORPS ↗
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 Collins Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation Trust · Careoregon Inc · OCF Joseph E Weston Public Foundation · Lora L and Martin N Kelley Family Foundation Trust · Seeding Justice · Juan Young Trust · Kaiser Foundation Hospitals · The Roundhouse Foundation · The Autzen 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 Harbourton Foundation 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.
- Rogue Farm Corps — 91% of income from government
- Lines for Life — 70% of income from government
- Mercy Corps — 47% of income from government
- Friends of Zenger Farm — 28% of income from government
- Isles Inc — 21% of income from government
- Oregon Food Bank — 21% of income from government
- Ecotrust — 14% of income from government
- Woodwell Climate Research Center Inc — 11% of income from government
- Central City Concern — 10% of income from government
- Homefront Inc — 9% of income from government
- Growing Gardens — 6% of income from government
- The Immigrant and Refugee Community Organization — 4% of income from government
- Friendly House Inc — 3% of income from government
- The Oregon Community Foundation — 2% of income from government
- Oregon Agricultural Trust — 2% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Harbourton Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Harbourton 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.