· Private foundation
Harris Family Foundation
Its FY2025 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 FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k6 grants · $35k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $155k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $100k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Bozeman Field School | $100,000 |
| Shedd Aquarium | $25,000 |
| Care for Real | $25,000 |
| Occidental College | $25,000 |
| Friends of the Children | $20,000 |
| Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon | $10,000 |
| Pomona College | $10,000 |
| KairosPDX | $10,000 |
| Field Museum | $10,000 |
| Lincoln Park Zoo | $10,000 |
| Oregon Food Bank | $10,000 |
| St Luke's Episcopal | $9,000 |
| Immigrant Refugee Community Org | $7,500 |
| Chinese Cultural Museum | $6,000 |
| Oregon Community Foundation | $5,000 |
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 (FY17–25, $217k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +68% since the first grant, against +36% for the ones you funded once.
34 repeat relationships — 16 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down.
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 FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
- BFBozeman Field School Inc6× · 2017–2025 · $370k · revenue +139% · 28% of their budget
- TFTHE FIELD SCHOOL INC4× · 2017–2024 · $210k · revenue +68%
CARE FOR REAL9× · 2017–2025 · $204k · revenue +38%
Funded once
- WIWESTMINSTER INGLESIDE PRESBYTERIAN FOUNDATIONgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $75k · revenue +53%
- MNMCLAREN NORTHERN MICHIGAN FOUNDATIONone grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue -71%
- WRWomen's Resource Center of Northernone grant, 2019 · $39k
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.
The mission of mit is to advance knowledge and educate students in science, technology, and other areas of scholarship that will best serve the nation and the world in the 21st century.
The bac is committed to provide excellence in design education grounded in practice and accessible to diverse communities.
Lewis & clark is a premier private higher education institution offering an exceptional education in an inclusive environment. by fostering critical thinking, innovation, creativity, civic engagement, and leadership, both inside and…
Dartmouth College educates the most promising students and prepares them for a lifetime of learning and of responsible leadership, through a faculty dedicated to teaching and the creation of knowledge.
The Marine Biological Laboratory (MBL) is a world-renowned center for biological discovery and training that is notably affiliated with more than 60 Nobel Prize winners. Research is conducted by full-time faculty as well as hundreds of the…
Education and Research
The University of New Haven is a student-centered comprehensive university with an emphasis on excellence in liberal arts and professional education. Our mission is to prepare our students to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives in a…
To educate students to be ethical and socially responsible leaders in a global community.
At Roger Williams University, students are prepared to be thinkers and doers ready to solve challenging problems with innovative solutions. RWU offers robust offerings of undergraduate, graduate and professional programs across eight…
Depauw university develops leaders the world needs through an uncommon commitment to the liberal arts. depauw's diverse and inclusive learning and living experience, distinctive in its rigorous intellectual engagement and its global and…
Lowell school (the school) provides educational services to approximately 314 students in grades pre-kindergarten through 8th grade. the school strives to create a diverse, equitable, and inclusive learning environment, and offers a…
The peak school seeks to ignite a passion for learning, to develop students of diverse talents and backgrounds who think critically and act with integrity, and to graduate compassionate, confident, capable students who will embrace their…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Field School Inc and the most unlike its peers is Upper Missouri Waterkeeper Inc. 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 42 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 2% 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.
37 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. 37 of the 61 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 Bozeman Field School Inc ↗
- Who funds THE FIELD SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds CARE FOR REAL ↗
- Who funds POMONA COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds SHEDD AQUARIUM SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Williams College ↗
- Who funds OCCIDENTAL COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds WESTMINSTER INGLESIDE PRESBYTERIAN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds LINCOLN PARK ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds FIELD MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY ↗
- Who funds OREGON FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds KAIROSPDX ↗
- Who funds MCLAREN NORTHERN MICHIGAN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PRESIDENT AND TRUSTEES OF BATES COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds CATLIN GABEL SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds TURTLE ISLAND RESTORATION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds Vermont Law School ↗
- Who funds Upper Missouri Waterkeeper Inc ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN RIVERS INC ↗
- Who funds THE SEED FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Little Traverse Conservancy Inc ↗
- Who funds TIP OF THE MITT WATERSHED COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE & EDUC FUND INC ↗
- Who funds THE MUSICAL OFFERING ↗
- Who funds PORTLAND CHILDREN'S MUSEUM ↗
- Who funds THE OREGON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds YWCA OF GREATER PORTLAND ↗
- Who funds MUSEUM OF THE ROCKIES INC ↗
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 Harold & Arlene Schnitzer Care Foundation · OCF Joseph E Weston Public Foundation · Juan Young Trust · The Collins Foundation · Clark Foundation · Rose E Tucker Charitable Trust · Maybelle Clark Macdonald Fund · Meyer Memorial Trust · The Autzen Foundation · Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation Trust · M J Murdock Charitable Trust
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 Harris Family 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.
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Oregon Food Bank — 21% of income from government
- Kairospdx — 19% of income from government
- Ywca of Greater Portland — 15% of income from government
- Vermont Law School — 14% of income from government
- The Oregon Community Foundation — 2% of income from government
- Williams College — 0% of income from government
- Catlin Gabel School — 0% 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 Harris Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Harris 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.