Skip to content
Harold & Margaret Taylor Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Harold & Margaret Taylor Foundation

Its FY2026 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$184k
Granted FY2026still arriving
22
Grants FY2026still arriving
3
States reached
$25k
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, FY2019 to 2025.

Education$689kAnimals$395kRecreation & Sports$42kHealth$40kInternational$30kFood & Nutrition$21kYouth Development$7kHuman Services$5kOther$0
02FY2026 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2026

  • Under $10k13 grants · $34k
  • $10k–50k9 grants · $150k
$5,000
Median grant
3
States reached
$3.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
University of Oregon Foundation$25,000
Park Academy$25,000
Oregon Humane Society$25,000
Pil Hall of Fame$20,000
Hopscotch Foundation$15,000
Tunnel to Towers Foundation$10,000
Oregon State University Foundation$10,000
University of Oregon Foundation$10,000
Rex Putnam High School$10,000
Samaritan's Purse$5,000
Feral Cat Coalition of Oregon$5,000
Dufur School$5,000
OHSU Foundation$5,000
Salvation Army$3,500
Sunshine Division Portland Police B$2,500
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 (FY23–26, $4k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 12%Clackamas Women's Services: $3k → 8%Boring Oregon Foundation: $1k → 8%Boring Oregon Foundation: $500 → 8%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.

Which US states its grants reach

WA
NY
OR
CA
UT
TN
NC
DC
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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 6% of Harold & Margaret Taylor Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address.

Harold & Margaret Taylor Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address
How this is measured
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 funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

95%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 27 repeat orgs$67k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +50% since the first grant, against +46% for those funded once.

27 repeat relationships: 17 still active in FY2026, 10 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2026 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

27
22

Total granted

$1.3M
$59k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+50%
+46%

Still filing today

52%
45%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $8k went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
EducationHealthAnimalsHuman ServicesPhilanthropyArts & CultureOther
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

  • OREGON HUMANE SOCIETY
    8× · 2019–2026 · $387k · revenue +60%
  • UNIVERSITY OF OREGON FOUNDATION
    8× · 2019–2026 · $320k · revenue +50%
  • THE PARK ACADEMY
    6× · 2019–2026 · $142k · revenue +25%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2022 · $10k
  • NC
    North Clackamas School District 12
    one grant, 2019 · $10k
  • IE
    IMBLER EDUCATION FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $10k · revenue +83%
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
Our Children Oregon

Our children oregon's mission is to be a voice and force for the common good for all oregon children, ensuring all children have the resources and opportunities they need to reach their full potential. we elevate data and the voices of…

Philanthropy
2
Portland State University Foundation

Portland state university foundation is responsible for raising and managing private resources to advance psu's priorities and mission to be a leading urban university.

—
3
Family and Community Together

Fact oregon empowers families, youth, and communities to navigate disability systems, advocating together for disability justice and policy change so that people with disabilities have what they need to thrive at home, in school, and in…

Human Services
4
Oregon Energy Systems Technology and Research
Environment
5
Oregon Public Health Association

Advocate for policies that protect and promote healthy and health equity for all people in oregon and provide learning, collaboration and leadership opportunities for public health professionals and the broader community.

Health
6
Careoregon Inc

To inspire and partner to create quality and equity in individual and community health.

Health
7
Attorney General's Sexual Assault Task Force

Oregon satf's mission is to build, connect, and sustain survivor-centered systems to prevent sexual violence and advocate for equitable, trauma-informed responses across oregon. we accomplish this by advancing primary prevention, fostering…

Crime & Legal
8
The Peregrine Fund Inc

To change the future for nature and humanity by conserving birds of prey worldwide.

—
9
Agricultural Research Foundation

Our mission is to encourage facilitate support and engage in scientific investigation and research experimentation and to advance educational and training activities related to agriculture and natural resources throughout the state of…

—
10
The Campbell Institute

Children's institute's mission is to leverage research, practice, policy, and advocacy to shift systems toward justice for families so that all of oregon's children, prenatal to grade 5, have access to opportunity.

Unclassified
11
Klcc Public Radio Foundation

The klcc public radio foundation secures vital financial resources and advocates for klcc public radio, enabling the station to fulfill its public service mission across a wide, 100-mile service area around eugene, oregon. this network of…

Community Improvement
12
Animal Wellness Action

To prevent cruelty to animals, we promote enacting and enforcing good public policies. enacting good laws depends upon electing good lawmakers, and we remind voters which candidates care about and support animal issues.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Providence Milwaukie Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Rescue Ranch. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

27 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 27 of the 54 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)
8
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/27
Grantees still filing
22/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UNIVERSITY OF OREGON FOUNDATION: $320,000 · EducationUNIVERSITY OF OREGON FOUNDATIONTHE PARK ACADEMY: $142,100 · EducationTHE PARK ACADEMYOregon State University Foundation: $60,000 · EducationOregon State University FoundationSTEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION: $20,000 · Education+1 more: $10,000 · EducationOREGON HUMANE SOCIETY: $386,500 · AnimalsOREGON HUMANE SOCIETYFeral Cat Coalition of Oregon: $22,000 · AnimalsFeral Cat Coalition of Oregon+1 more: $1,000 · AnimalsPil Hall of Fame: $65,000 · OtherPil Hall of FameRex Putnam High School: $50,000 · OtherRex Putnam High SchoolESTACADA SCHOOL DISTRICT: $45,000 · OtherESTACADA SCHOOL DISTRICTNorth Clackamas School District: $40,000 · OtherNorth Clackamas School Distri…South Wasco School District 1: $40,000 · OtherSouth Wasco School District 1Dufur School: $35,000 · OtherDufur School+31 more: $91,100 · Other+31 moreHOPSCOTCH FOUNDATION: $30,000 · HealthFANCONI CANCER FOUNDATION: $15,000 · HealthST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $3,000 · Health+1 more: $1,500 · HealthSAMARITAN'S PURSE: $25,000 · ReligionWORLD VISION INC: $10,000 · InternationalOREGON HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE CARE: $5,000 · Human ServicesCLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $2,500 · Human ServicesBORING OREGON FOUNDATION: $1,500 · Human Services
Education$552,100Animals$409,500Other$366,100Health$49,500Religion$25,000International$10,000Human Services$9,000

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 budgetOREGON HUMANE SOCIETY: $386,500 over 8y, 0.3% of budgetUNIVERSITY OF OREGON FOUNDATION: $320,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetTHE PARK ACADEMY: $142,100 over 6y, 1.2% of budgetOregon State University Foundation: $60,000 over 6y, 0.0% of budgetSAMARITAN'S PURSE: $25,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFeral Cat Coalition of Oregon: $22,000 over 5y, 0.3% of budgetFANCONI CANCER FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWORLD VISION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetIMBLER EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 3.0% of budgetOREGON HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE CARE: $5,000 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetPORTLAND ROSE FESTIVAL FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC: $3,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSHERMAN COUNTY ATHLETIC FOUNDATION: $2,000 over 3y, 4.7% of budgetPROVIDENCE MILWAUKIE FOUNDATION: $1,500 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetBLANCHET HOUSE OF HOSPITALITY: $1,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBORING OREGON FOUNDATION: $1,500 over 2y, 4.3% of budgetFRIENDS OF CEDAR MESA: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRESCUE RANCH: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetJUDICIAL WATCH INC: $500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAMERICAN MILITARY ENCOURAGEMENT NETWORK: $500 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPORTLAND MOUNTAIN RESCUE: $100 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.

  • Who funds OREGON HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds UNIVERSITY OF OREGON FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds THE PARK ACADEMY ↗
  • Who funds Oregon State University Foundation ↗
  • Who funds HOPSCOTCH FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds SAMARITAN'S PURSE ↗
  • Who funds Feral Cat Coalition of Oregon ↗
  • Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FANCONI CANCER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds WORLD VISION INC ↗
  • Who funds IMBLER EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds OREGON HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE CARE ↗
  • Who funds PORTLAND ROSE FESTIVAL FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
  • Who funds CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds SHERMAN COUNTY ATHLETIC FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds PROVIDENCE MILWAUKIE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds BLANCHET HOUSE OF HOSPITALITY ↗
  • Who funds BORING OREGON FOUNDATION ↗

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 Robert D and Marc…The Autzen FoundationThe Ford Family Found…Edward Jones Foundati…The Blackbaud Giving …The Bank of America C…Network for GoodAmerican Online Givin…Natl Christian Charit…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …
The Oregon Community FoundationOR17.5× affinity7 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Oregon Community Foundation · The Robert D and Marcia H Randall Charitable Trust · The Autzen Foundation · The Ford Family Foundation · Edward Jones Foundation · The Blackbaud Giving Fund · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · Network for Good · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund

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 Harold & Margaret Taylor Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Harold & Margaret Taylor Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 110%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 31%
  • Boring Oregon Foundation: 100% of income from government
  • Clackamas Women's Services: 33% of income from government
  • American Military Encouragement Network: 31% of income from government
  • Portland Rose Festival Foundation: 1% of income from government
  • Oregon State University Foundation: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
11get no government money at all
2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely 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 54 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Harold & Margaret Taylor’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