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

· Public charity

Hollis Foundation

The Hollis Foundation is a supporting organization of The Oregon Community Foundation (OCF).

$4.6M
Granted FY2024still arriving
13
Grants FY2024still arriving
5
States reached
$1.0M
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, FY2019 to 2024.

Environment$14MRecreation & Sports$1.1MPublic Benefit$500kEducation$50k
02FY2024 · 13 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 13 grants below total $3,115,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $4,615,000 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $1,500,000 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.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $15k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $500k
  • $250k+5 grants · $2.6M
$100,000
Median grant
5
States reached
$147M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Oregon Community Foundation$1,000,000
Columbia Land Trust$500,000
Wood River Land Trust Company$400,000
Oregon Agricultural Trust$350,000
Nature Conservancy National$350,000
Willamette Falls Trust$100,000
1000 Friends of Oregon$100,000
Lomakatsi Restoration Project$75,000
Land Trust Alliance Inc$75,000
Gray Family Foundation$50,000
Coalition of Oregon Land Trusts$50,000
Friends of Tryon Creek State Park$50,000
Black Oregon Land Trust$15,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 49% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 9%Wood River Land Trust: $1.1M → 7%Land Trust Alliance Inc: $75k → 14%Willamette Falls Trust: $300k → 8%Deschutes Land Trust: $125k → 10%Oregon Community Foundation: $1.0M → 12%Lomakatsi Restoration Project: $75k → 13%North Coast Land Conservancy: $300k → 13%Oregon Agricultural Trust: $1.0M → 14%Columbia Land Trust: $1.8M → 9%Nature Conservancy National: $450k → 7%Wood River Land Trust Company: $400k → 7%Land Trust Alliance Inc: $75k → 14%Willamette Falls Trust: $100k → 8%Oregon Community Foundation: $500k → 12%Oregon Agricultural Trust: $750k → 14%Columbia Land Trust: $500k → 9%Nature Conservancy National: $350k → 7%Wood River Land Trust Company: $155k → 7%Land Trust Alliance Inc: $50k → 14%Willamette Falls Trust: $100k → 8%Gray Family Foundation: $50k → 12%Oregon Agricultural Trust: $400k → 14%Columbia Land Trust: $500k → 9%Willamette Falls Trust: $50k → 8%Black Oregon Land Trust: $15k → 12%Oregon Agricultural Trust: $350k → 14%Columbia Land Trust: $500k → 9%Audubon Society of Portland: $50k → 12%Columbia Land Trust: $250k → 9%Nature Conservancy in Oregon: $500k → 12%Nature Conservancy in Oregon: $250k → 12%1000 Friends of Oregon: $100k → 12%1000 Friends of Oregon: $100k → 12%Coalition of Oregon Land Trusts: $74k → 12%Friends of Tryon Creek State Park: $50k → 12%Friends of Tryon Creek State Park: $50k → 12%1000 Friends of Oregon: $175k → 12%1000 Friends of Oregon: $150k → 12%Coalition of Oregon Land Trusts: $50k → 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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

94%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$11M · 8 repeat orgs$715k to everyone else

8 repeat relationships: 8 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

8
4

Total granted

$11M
$575k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
+61%

Still filing today

100%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 92% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $140k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentRecreation & SportsPhilanthropyFood & 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

  • COLUMBIA LAND TRUST
    6× · 2019–2024 · $4.1M · revenue +51%
  • Oregon Agricultural Trust
    5× · 2020–2024 · $3.0M · revenue +3% · 79% of their budget
  • WR
    WOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO
    4× · 2019–2024 · $1.8M · revenue +121% · 33% of their budget

Funded once

  • NC
    North Coast Land Conservancy Inc
    one grant, 2021 · $300k · revenue -54%
  • DL
    Deschutes Land Trustgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $125k · revenue +154%
  • OD
    OREGON DESERT LAND TRUST
    one grant, 2022 · $100k · revenue -13%
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
Wallowa Land Trust

Our mission is to protect the rural nature of Wallowa County by working cooperatively with private landowners,indigenous people, local communities and governmental entities to conserve land.

Environment
2
Oregon Natural Resources Council Fund Oregon Wild

Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations.

Environment
3
Wild Rivers Land Trust

Our mission is to conserve the natural treasures and working lands on oregons wild rivers coast in perpetuity.

Environment
4
Southern Oregon Land Conservancy Inc

To conserve and enhance land in southern oregon to sustain our human and natural communities forever.

Environment
5
The Wetlands Conservancy Inc

Founded in 1981, the wetlands conservancy is dedicated to working in partnership with communities statewide to permanently protect, conserve and restore oregon's greatest wetlands.

Environment
6
Whatcom Land Trust

The mission of the Whatcom Land Trust is to preserve and protect wildlife habitat, scenic, agricultural and open space lands in Whatcom County for future generations by securing interests in land and promoting land stewardship.

Environment
7
Western Rivers Conservancy

Western rivers conservancy's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states. continued on schedule o.we acquire land to conserve critical habitat, provide public access for compatible use and enjoyment, and…

Environment
8
McKenzie River Trust

Acquire and manage land and conservation easements through purchase and donation to ensure long term conservation of clean water, fish and wildlife habitat, and other community values.

Environment
9
Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…

Environment
10
Ozark Regional Land Trust Inc Dba Ozark Land Trust

Ozark regional land trust's mission is to empower people to protect the natural resources of the ozarks forever. this is accomplished through various methods including conservation easements and nature preserves.

Environment
11
Palouse Land Trust Inc

Our mission is to work with landowners and communities to conserve the lands we love, now and forever, and to enrich connections to the natural world.

Environment
12
Northern California Regional Land Trust

The purpose of the organization is to monitor, manage, and preserve conservation easements it stewards in northern california. the organization acquires conservation easements in land exhibiting important natural features to protect and…

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is 1000 Friends of Oregon; the most unlike its peers is Wood River Land Trust Co. 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

17 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.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
10/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COLUMBIA LAND TRUST: $4,085,000 · EnvironmentCOLUMBIA LAND TRUSTOregon Agricultural Trust: $3,000,000 · EnvironmentOregon Agricultural TrustWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO: $1,815,750 · EnvironmentWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST COWILLAMETTE FALLS TRUST: $1,050,000 · EnvironmentWILLAMETTE FALLS TRUST1000 FRIENDS OF OREGON: $625,000 · Environment+7 more: $1,149,000 · Environment+7 moreTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1,850,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CO…THE OREGON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,500,000 · PhilanthropyTHE OREGON …+1 more: $50,000 · PhilanthropyFriends of Tryon Creek: $100,000 · Recreation & SportsBLACK OREGON LAND TRUST: $15,000 · Food & Nutrition
Environment$11,724,750Other$1,850,000Philanthropy$1,550,000Recreation & Sports$100,000Food & Nutrition$15,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOLUMBIA LAND TRUST: $4,085,000 over 6y, 20% of budgetOregon Agricultural Trust: $3,000,000 over 5y, 79% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $1,850,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetWOOD RIVER LAND TRUST CO: $1,815,750 over 4y, 33% of budgetTHE OREGON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,500,000 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetWILLAMETTE FALLS TRUST: $1,050,000 over 5y, 83% of budget1000 FRIENDS OF OREGON: $625,000 over 5y, 11% of budgetNorth Coast Land Conservancy Inc: $300,000 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetLAND TRUST ALLIANCE INC: $275,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetThe Coalition of Oregon Land Trusts: $224,000 over 4y, 13% of budgetDeschutes Land Trust: $125,000 over 1y, 4.9% of budgetFriends of Tryon Creek: $100,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetOREGON DESERT LAND TRUST: $100,000 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetLOMAKATSI RESTORATION PROJECT: $75,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetBIRD ALLIANCE OF OREGON INC: $50,000 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetGray Family Foundation: $50,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetBLACK OREGON LAND TRUST: $15,000 over 1y, 3.2% 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 …Meyer Memorial TrustThe Roundhouse Founda…Land Trust Alliance I…The Collins FoundationThe Healy FoundationThe Nature ConservancyLeupold & Stevens Fou…The Lazar FoundationMaybelle Clark Macdon…The Burning FoundationNational Fish and Wil…
The Oregon Community FoundationOR27.6× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Oregon Community Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · The Roundhouse Foundation · Land Trust Alliance Inc · The Collins Foundation · The Healy Foundation · The Nature Conservancy · Leupold & Stevens Foundation · The Lazar Foundation · Maybelle Clark Macdonald Fund · The Burning Foundation · National Fish and Wildlife 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 Hollis Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Hollis Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%6%23%51%90%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 6%
  • Lomakatsi Restoration Project: 100% of income from government
  • Deschutes Land Trust: 46% of income from government
  • The Coalition of Oregon Land Trusts: 18% of income from government
  • North Coast Land Conservancy Inc: 6% of income from government
  • The Oregon Community Foundation: 2% of income from government
  • Oregon Agricultural Trust: 2% of income from government
  • Bird Alliance of Oregon Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
5report 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.
05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Hollis Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Hollis 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 17 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Hollis’ 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