· Private foundation
Lamb Weston Charitable 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.
Read this first · the figures below need context
59% of Lamb Weston Charitable Foundation’s FY2024 grant dollars went to American Online Giving Foundation Inc, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2024 names 5 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2022, the last year Lamb Weston Charitable Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 855 organizations, $919k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
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 · FY2022
- Under $10k1265 grants · $300k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $184k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $436k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE IDAHO FOODBANK | $110,000 |
| SECOND HARVEST INLAND NORTHWEST | $100,000 |
| OREGON FOOD BANK | $100,000 |
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INCORPORATED | $64,054 |
| SCHOLARSHIP AMERICA | $61,500 |
| ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL | $41,847 |
| NORTH COUNTRY FOOD BANK | $25,000 |
| NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK | $25,000 |
| FOOD BANK OF NORTHEAST LOUISIANA | $25,000 |
| TABER FOOD BANK SOCIETY | $21,294 |
| IDAHO FOODBANK WAREHOUSE | $21,250 |
| SECOND HARVEST INLAND NORTHWEST | $14,450 |
| RONALD MCDONALD HOUSE CHARITIES OF IDAHO | $10,000 |
| OREGON FOOD BANK INC | $9,575 |
| SHARE OUR STRENGTH INC | $6,900 |
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 (FY20–22, $117k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 88% 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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 34% of Lamb Weston Charitable 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +30% since the first grant, against +27% for the ones you funded once.
858 repeat relationships — 586 still active in FY2022, 272 since wound down; 382 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (too recent to call). Read against FY2022, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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, 94% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k 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
- IFIDAHO FOODBANK WAREHOUSE5× · 2020–2024 · $538k · revenue +4%
- SHSECOND HARVEST INLAND NORTHWEST5× · 2020–2024 · $507k · revenue +14%
OREGON FOOD BANK5× · 2020–2024 · $444k · revenue +7%
Funded once
- UWUNITED WAY OF NE MINNESOTAgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue +30%
- SMST MARKS SCHOOL FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $3k · revenue +160%
UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN - EAU CLAIRE FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $2k · revenue +141%
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 washington humane society protects animals, supports families, and advocates for positive change to create a world where all animals can thrive. we enrich the humanity of our communities by promoting compassion and encouraging people…
The Animal Refuge League of Greater Portland nurtures the connection between people and pets to advance animal welfare and improve the quality of life in our community.
Marin humane transforms lives through exceptional animal care, humane education, and advocacy. every day, marin humane inspires compassion and positive relationships between people and animals.
Our goal is to sustainably improve animal welfare, provide veterinary care, and improve veterinary education globally. in order to achieve this goal, we work in over 10 countries, across 5 continents, supporting local people and animals,…
Disability rights washington's mission is to advance the dignity, equality, and self determination of people with disabilities. we work to pursue justice on matters related to human and legal rights.
To improve and save lives through compassionate care, community engagement and advocacy for animals.
The friends are dedicated to the rescue, protection, and adoption of companion animals in need while inspiring the human-animal bond. we meet our mission by:-saving 100% of healthy and treatable animals.-providing high-quality animal care…
Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.
Shelter Animal Resource Alliance rescues, assists, and advocates for shelter animals in Lane County by developing and implementing programs designed to increase the number of animals adopted into permanent, loving homes and decrease the…
Animal outlook is a national animal protection organization working to end the abuse of farmed animals using a variety of strategies, including investigations, legal advocacy, corporate and food system reform, and vegan outreach.
To bring animals out of crisis and strengthen the bond between people and animals through emergency sheltering, disaster relief services, financial assistance and education. redrover accomplishes its mission by engaging volunteers and…
Reduce the euthanasia rate of healthy and adoptable animals and improve the lives of companion animals by finding permanent homes for animals in need, providing support to communities who do not have access to humane organizations,…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of Idaho and the most unlike its peers is Imagine a Cure Cancer Treatment. 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 27 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% 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.
1482 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. 1482 of the 2,000 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 AMERICAN ONLINE GIVING FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds IDAHO FOODBANK WAREHOUSE ↗
- Who funds SECOND HARVEST INLAND NORTHWEST ↗
- Who funds OREGON FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds NAACP EMPOWERMENT PROGRAMS INC ↗
- Who funds ST JUDE CHILDREN'S RESEARCH HOSPITAL INC ↗
- Who funds NORTH COUNTRY FOOD BANK INC ↗
- Who funds NORTHERN ILLINOIS FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds FOOD BANK OF NORTHEAST LOUISIANA INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds SHARE OUR STRENGTH ↗
- Who funds CHARITIES AID FOUNDATION AMERICA ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds Thurgood Marshall College Fund ↗
- Who funds Ronald McDonald House Charities Of Idaho Inc ↗
- Who funds SHRINERS HOSPITALS FOR CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds WENATCHEE VALLEY UNITED SOCCER CLUB ↗
- Who funds Seattle Children's Foundation ↗
- Who funds EASTERN OREGON MISSION ↗
- Who funds FUZZ BALL ANIMAL RESCUE ↗
- Who funds Women's and Children's Alliance ↗
- Who funds TRI-CITIES CANCER CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE FOR PETS MAGIC VALLEY HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE COLUMBIA BASIN ↗
- Who funds BENTON FRANKLIN HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds LAKES AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗
- Who funds IMMIGRANT LAW CENTER OF MINNESOTA 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: 3 Rivers Community Foundation · Idaho Power Foundation Inc · United Way of Benton & Franklin Counties · Laura Moore Cunningham Foundation Inc · St Luke's Health System Ltd · Claude R & Ethel B Whittenberger Foundation · Blue Cross of Idaho Foundation for Health Inc · Simplot Company Foundation Inc · The Julius C Jeker Foundation Inc · Idaho Community Foundation Inc · Idaho Womens Charitable Foundation · Jeker Family 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 Lamb Weston Charitable 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Mercy Corps — 47% of income from government
- Childrens Cancer Therapy Development Institute — 44% of income from government
- Save the Children Federation Inc — 30% of income from government
- Prudence Crandall Center Inc — 30% of income from government
- Oregon Food Bank — 21% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Oregon Health & Science University Foundation — 1% of income from government
- Wounded Warrior Project Inc — 0% of income from government
- Shriners Hospitals for Children — 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 Lamb Weston Charitable Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Lamb Weston Charitable 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.