Skip to content
James & Lila Miller Charitable Trust at a glance

· Private foundation

James & Lila Miller Charitable Trust

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.

$243k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$115k
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.

Education$600kInternational$498kHousing & Shelter$438kCommunity Improvement$300kReligion$193kArts & Culture$171kHuman Services$93kPhilanthropy$47kOther$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k3 grants · $15k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $63k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $165k
$25,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$5.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GEORGE FOX UNIVERSITY$115,000
the Contingent$50,000
KMHOORG$28,000
Mt Olivet Baptist Church$25,000
ROSE HAVEN$10,000
WYCLIFFE BIBLE TRANSLATORS$7,500
Oregon Volunteer Firefighters Associatio$5,000
Kairos Prison Ministry International Inc$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 (FY22–22, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%PDX DIAPER BANK: $10k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

NY
MA
OR
IN
CA
KY
NM
DC
TX
FL
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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.1M · 16 repeat orgs$421k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +36% since the first grant, against +33% for those funded once.

16 repeat relationships: 7 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

16
27

Total granted

$2.1M
$396k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+33%

Still filing today

44%
44%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $25k 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
InternationalHealthEducationHousing & ShelterCommunity ImprovementFood & 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

  • GF
    GEORGE FOX UNIVERSITY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $595k · revenue +36%
  • ROSE HAVEN CIC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $363k · revenue +303%
  • MC
    Mercy Corps
    5× · 2017–2021 · $330k · revenue +19%

Funded once

  • MEDICAL TEAMS INTERNATIONALgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $50k · revenue +33%
  • WW
    WEST WOMEN SHELTER
    one grant, 2021 · $50k
  • PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION
    one grant, 2022 · $25k · revenue -14%
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
Water for Good

Water for good's mission is to transform lives through sustainable access to safe water as well as improved sanitation and hygiene in the places that need it most.

International
2
Well Aware Inc

Well Aware's mission is to provide innovative and sustainable solutions to water scarcity and contamination in East Africa.

International
3
MedGlobal Inc

MedGlobal is a humanitarian non-governmental organization working to serve vulnerable communities around the world by providing innovative, free, and sustainable healthcare. Our health services support refugees, displaced persons, and…

Health
4
International Medical Corps

To save lives & relieve suffering through health interventions & related activities that strengthen communities affected by conflict, natural disasters & disease outbreaks.

International
5
Global Partners in Care

The organization's mission is to build partnerships to enhance compassionate care globally. we are dedicated to improving access to hospice and palliative care worldwide.

International
6
Lifewater Inc

Lifewater international is a non-profit christian water development organization dedicated to effectively serving vulnerable children and families by partnering with underserved communities to overcome water poverty.

Environment
7
Water to Thrive

Water to Thrive transforms lives in rural Africa by working with partners and beneficiaries to bring the blessing of clean, safe water, connecting communities in need with supporters who have the heart and spirit to make a difference

International
8
Partnership for Resource Development Inc

Serving the displaced in the middle east.

Religion
9
Globus Relief

The mission of globus relief is to improve the delivery of healthcare worldwide by gathering, processing and distributing surplus medical and health supplies to charities at home and abroad.

International
10
Pilgrim Africa

Pilgrim Africa's mission is to challenge despair, love boldly, and help African people create a future of sustainable prosperity and health. We give ourselves in service to others regardless of economic, religious, or social standing,…

International
11
Planet Aid Inc

Protect the environment, reduce waste, and increase the efficient use of vital resources. strengthen and organize communities, reduce poverty and promote small enterprise development, support sustainable local food production, improve…

International
12
Gazelle Foundation

Gazelle Foundation's mission is to improve the quality of life for people in Burundi, Africa by providing access to clean water.

Philanthropy
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Food for the Poor Inc; the most unlike its peers is WaterAfrica. 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

19 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. 19 of the 44 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
13/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

KMHOORG: $136,000 · OtherKMHOORGSALVATION ARMY WHITE SHIELD CENTER: $65,000 · OtherSALVATION ARMY WHITE SHIELD C…WEST WOMEN SHELTER: $50,000 · OtherWEST WOMEN SHELTERWYCLIFFE BIBLE TRANSLATORS INC: $37,500 · OtherWYCLIFFE BIBLE TRANSLATORS IN…UNION GOSPEL MISSION: $30,000 · OtherMAYBELLE CENTER FOR COMM: $30,000 · OtherPORTLAND RESCUE MISSION: $27,520 · OtherTEAM WESTERN KY TORNADO RELIEF: $25,000 · OtherWATER AFRICA: $25,000 · OtherFARA: $25,000 · OtherMT OLIVET BAPTIST CHURCH: $25,000 · OtherWHITE SHIELD HOME: $25,000 · Other+19 more: $153,000 · Other+19 moreGEORGE FOX UNIVERSITY: $595,000 · EducationGEORGE FOX UNIVERSITYMercy Corps: $330,000 · InternationalMercy CorpsKIZIMANI: $54,800 · InternationalKIZIMANIMEDICAL TEAMS INTERNATIONAL: $50,000 · InternationalMEDICAL TEAMS INTERNATIO…WaterAfrica: $35,000 · InternationalWaterAfricaRAZOM INC: $25,000 · InternationalFOOD FOR THE POOR INC: $25,000 · International+1 more: $7,500 · InternationalROSE HAVEN CIC: $362,500 · Housing & ShelterROSE HAVEN CICTHE CONTINGENT: $300,000 · Community ImprovementTHE CONTINGEN…PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $25,000 · HealthGO THE DISTANCE: $5,000 · HealthPDX DIAPER BANK: $10,000 · Human Services
Other$654,020Education$595,000International$527,300Housing & Shelter$362,500Community Improvement$300,000Health$30,000Human Services$10,000

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 budgetGEORGE FOX UNIVERSITY: $595,000 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetROSE HAVEN CIC: $362,500 over 8y, 4.5% of budgetMercy Corps: $330,000 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetTHE CONTINGENT: $300,000 over 6y, 1.9% of budgetKIZIMANI: $54,800 over 4y, 10.0% of budgetMEDICAL TEAMS INTERNATIONAL: $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWaterAfrica: $35,000 over 2y, 13% of budgetPARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetRAZOM INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetFOOD FOR THE POOR INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPDX DIAPER BANK: $10,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetURBAN GLEANERS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetWILLIAM TEMPLE HOUSE: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetOregon Volunteer Firefighters Association: $10,000 over 2y, 5.7% of budgetANZA-BORREGO FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetFAITH IN PRACTICE: $7,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetLOWER EAST SIDE TENEMENT MUSEUM: $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetStumptown Strays: $5,000 over 1y, 2.8% of budgetGO THE DISTANCE: $5,000 over 1y, 1.5% 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 GEORGE FOX UNIVERSITY ↗
  • Who funds ROSE HAVEN CIC ↗
  • Who funds Mercy Corps ↗
  • Who funds THE CONTINGENT ↗
  • Who funds KIZIMANI ↗
  • Who funds MEDICAL TEAMS INTERNATIONAL ↗
  • Who funds WaterAfrica ↗
  • Who funds PARTNERS IN HEALTH A NONPROFIT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds RAZOM INC ↗
  • Who funds FOOD FOR THE POOR INC ↗
  • Who funds PDX DIAPER BANK ↗
  • Who funds URBAN GLEANERS ↗
  • Who funds WILLIAM TEMPLE HOUSE ↗
  • Who funds Oregon Volunteer Firefighters Association ↗
  • Who funds ANZA-BORREGO FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FAITH IN PRACTICE ↗
  • Who funds LOWER EAST SIDE TENEMENT MUSEUM ↗
  • Who funds Stumptown Strays ↗

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 …Hillman Family Founda…Marie Lamfrom Charita…American Online Givin…Vanguard Charitable E…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
The Oregon Community FoundationOR14.2× affinity5 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Oregon Community Foundation · Hillman Family Foundations · Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation Trust · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · Donor Advised Charitable Giving 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 James & Lila Miller Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from James & Lila Miller Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 40%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Mercy Corps: 47% of income from government
  • Medical Teams International: 14% of income from government
  • The Contingent: 5% of income from government
  • Pdx Diaper Bank: 2% of income from government
  • George Fox University: 2% of income from government
  • William Temple House: 0% of income from government
  • Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation: 0% of income from government
  • Food for the Poor Inc: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
4get 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 · 0–75%
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 James & Lila Miller Charitable Trust?

Find your warmest path to James & Lila Miller Charitable Trust 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 44 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 James & Lila Miller’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