Skip to content
Lane Workforce Partnership at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Lane Workforce Partnership

To meet the workforce needs of employers and individuals through partnerships and innovations in lane county, oregon.

$3.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$1.4M
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.

Employment$17MEducation$4.2MHuman Services$911kPublic Safety & Disaster$700kCommunity Improvement$208kYouth Development$198kEnvironment$75kScience & Tech$19k
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $85k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $465k
  • $250k+4 grants · $3.3M
$131,015
Median grant
2
States reached
$977k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
LANE COUNTY (ADULTYOUTHSTEP)$1,363,210
CONNECTED LANE COUNTY$1,039,374
COLLABORATIVE EDO$474,578
NURTURELY$374,469
OREGON HOSPITALITY FOUNDATION$156,008
PIVOT ARCHITECTURE$131,015
NAACP EUGENE SPRINGFIELD$126,821
REVEILLE FOUNDATION$50,763
OPPORTUNITY OREGON$44,307
OMEP$28,219
INSTITUTE FOR NETWORKED COMMUNITIES$12,506
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 (FY19–25, $1.9M) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%LOOKING GLASS: $287k → 15%LOOKING GLASS: $279k → 15%LOOKING GLASS: $38k → 15%CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICES: $51k → 15%MCKENZIE CDC: $190k → 15%MCKENZIE CDC: $30k → 15%NURTURELY: $374k → 15%NURTURELY: $348k → 15%NURTURELY: $188k → 15%REVEILLE FOUNDATION: $51k → 15%MCKENZIE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP: $49k → 15%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.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$20M · 27 repeat orgs$2.8M to everyone else

27 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

27
28

Total granted

$20M
$2.6M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+8%
+21%

Still filing today

48%
32%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 95% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $182k went to new ones.

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

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

’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesCommunity ImprovementEmploymentEducationPublic Safety & DisasterPhilanthropyOther
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

  • CE
    COLLABORATIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
    3× · 2023–2025 · $996k · revenue +72% · 85% of their budget
  • Nurturely
    3× · 2023–2025 · $911k · revenue +27%
  • LG
    LOOKING GLASS COMMUNITY SERVICES
    3× · 2019–2021 · $604k · revenue +134%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2019 · $1.2M
  • RA
    REGIONAL ACCELERATOR & INNOVATION NETWORKgraduated
    one grant, 2019 · $183k · revenue +49%
  • LC
    LANE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT
    one grant, 2019 · $120k
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
Eastern Oregon Workforce Board

To coordinate the resources need to help employers succeed and individuals to advance through innovation and partnerships.

Community Improvement
2
Lane Workforce Partnership

To meet the workforce needs of employers and individuals through partnerships and innovations in lane county, oregon.

—
3
Economic Development for Central Oregon Inc

Lead the diversification of central oregon's economy through marketing, targeted recruitment, business expansion, formation of effective public/private partnerships and venture coaching for early stage companies.

—
4
Northeast Oregon Economic Development District

The mission of NEOEDD is to contribute to a vibrant rural economy by providing consulting, training, financing, referrals and other assistance to businesses, entrepreneurs, local governments and non-profit organizations in Northeast Oregon.

Religion
5
Team for Economic Action in Molalla

To build and maintain strong, diverse business districts; to create and retain living wage jobs; and to promote Molalla as a rewarding place to work, live, invest, and shop.

Community Improvement
6
Oregon Restaurant and Lodging Association

Orla serves as the leading industry advocate, striving to protect, improve and promote oregon hospitality.

—
7
Valley Vision Inc

To provide for the expansion of the employment base of Nez Perce County, by promoting the benefits of Nez Perce County to businesses and industries throughout the world that may have an interest in conducting operations in Nez Perce County.

—
8
Priority Oregon

To support public policies that will help oregon's economy and create new family supporting jobs in oregon.

—
9
Oregon Human Development Corporation

To promote economic and social advancement of farmworkers and disadvantaged individuals through the provision of education, training, advocacy and services that enhance self-sufficiency.

Human Services
10
Oregon Agricultural Trust

Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.

Environment
11
Edc Team Jefferson

EDC Team Jefferson focuses on high-leverage, place-based activities that improve the economic well-being and quality of life for people in Jefferson County, and the living systems in which we are embedded.

Community Improvement
12
Lane Community College Education Association

Lane Community College Education Association is the union that represents 200 full-time and 375 part-time faculty members at Lane Community College in Eugene, Oregon. LCCEA is an affiliated unit of the Oregon Education Association (OEA)…

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Onward Eugene; the most unlike its peers is Lovefirst. 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

26 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. 26 of the 57 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.

6
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
7
Early backer (in before they grew)
23/26
Grantees still filing
17/26
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LANE COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH: $8,347,234 · OtherLANE COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTHLANE EDUCATION SERVICES DISTRICT: $1,398,826 · OtherLANE EDUCATION SERVICES DISTRICTIndividual grant recipient: $1,201,610 · OtherIndividual grant recipient+35 more: $3,446,404 · Other+35 moreCONNECTED LANE COUNTY: $4,001,938 · EducationCONNECTED LANE COUN…+1 more: $53,760 · EducationNurturely: $910,776 · Human ServicesNurturelyLOOKING GLASS COMMUNITY SERVICES: $604,274 · Human ServicesLOOKING G…McKenzie Community Development Corporation: $268,591 · Human ServicesMcKenzie …+2 more: $101,873 · Human Services+2 moreCOLLABORATIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: $995,857 · EmploymentNORTHWEST YOUTH CORPS: $150,771 · Employment+2 more: $53,702 · EmploymentONWARD EUGENE: $317,906 · Community ImprovementOregon Manufacturing Extension Partnership Inc: $214,670 · Community ImprovementREGIONAL ACCELERATOR & INNOVATION NETWORK: $183,222 · Community ImprovementSPRINGFIELD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $44,686 · Community Improvement+1 more: $24,750 · Community ImprovementLOVEFIRST: $397,920 · Public Safety & DisasterOREGON HOSPITALITY FOUNDATION: $237,000 · PhilanthropyOpportunity Oregon Inc: $78,121 · Crime & Legal
Other$14,394,074Education$4,055,698Human Services$1,885,514Employment$1,200,330Community Improvement$785,234Public Safety & Disaster$397,920Philanthropy$237,000Crime & Legal$78,121

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCONNECTED LANE COUNTY: $4,001,938 over 3y, 36% of budgetCOLLABORATIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: $995,857 over 3y, 85% of budgetNurturely: $910,776 over 3y, 22% of budgetLOOKING GLASS COMMUNITY SERVICES: $604,274 over 3y, 1.8% of budgetLOVEFIRST: $397,920 over 3y, 27% of budgetONWARD EUGENE: $317,906 over 2y, 29% of budgetNAACP Eugene-Springfield Branch 1119: $303,695 over 2y, 25% of budgetMcKenzie Community Development Corporation: $268,591 over 3y, 5.1% of budgetOREGON HOSPITALITY FOUNDATION: $237,000 over 2y, 44% of budgetOregon Manufacturing Extension Partnership Inc: $214,670 over 6y, 1.3% of budgetREGIONAL ACCELERATOR & INNOVATION NETWORK: $183,222 over 1y, 23% of budgetSPONSORS INC: $172,562 over 3y, 2.8% of budgetNORTHWEST YOUTH CORPS: $150,771 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetTECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION OF OREGON: $101,270 over 3y, 3.4% of budgetEUGENE AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $100,001 over 1y, 5.8% of budgetOpportunity Oregon Inc: $78,121 over 2y, 21% of budgetPEARL BUCK CENTER INCORPORATED: $53,760 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetSPRINGFIELD AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $44,686 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetEAST CASCADES WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD: $30,102 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetFOOD FOR LANE COUNTY: $30,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBohemia Food Hub: $24,750 over 1y, 15% of budgetROGUE WORKFORCE PARTNERSHIP: $23,600 over 1y, 0.4% 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 CONNECTED LANE COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds COLLABORATIVE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ↗
  • Who funds Nurturely ↗
  • Who funds LOOKING GLASS COMMUNITY SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds LOVEFIRST ↗
  • Who funds ONWARD EUGENE ↗
  • Who funds NAACP Eugene-Springfield Branch 1119 ↗
  • Who funds CASCADE RELIEF TEAM ↗
  • Who funds McKenzie Community Development Corporation ↗
  • Who funds OREGON HOSPITALITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds Oregon Manufacturing Extension Partnership Inc ↗
  • Who funds REGIONAL ACCELERATOR & INNOVATION NETWORK ↗
  • Who funds SPONSORS INC ↗
  • Who funds NORTHWEST YOUTH CORPS ↗
  • Who funds TECHNOLOGY ASSOCIATION OF OREGON ↗
  • Who funds EUGENE AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ↗
  • Who funds Opportunity Oregon Inc ↗
  • Who funds NEIGHBORHOOD ECONOMIC DEVELOP CORP ↗
  • Who funds PEARL BUCK CENTER INCORPORATED ↗
  • Who funds CATHOLIC COMMUNITY SERVICES OF LANE COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds THE REVEILLE 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.

United Way of Lane Co…The Oregon Community …Lane Community Health…The Ford Family Found…Chambers Family Found…Food for Lane CountyPeaceHealthOnpoint Community Cre…The Roundhouse Founda…The Collins FoundationOccu Foundation IncMcKay Family Foundati…
United Way of Lane CountyOR34.5× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of Lane County · The Oregon Community Foundation · Lane Community Health Council · The Ford Family Foundation · Chambers Family Foundation · Food for Lane County · PeaceHealth · Onpoint Community Credit Union · The Roundhouse Foundation · The Collins Foundation · Occu Foundation Inc · McKay Family 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 Lane Workforce Partnership funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Lane Workforce Partnership. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 60%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 17%
  • Northwest Youth Corps: 100% of income from government
  • Rogue Workforce Partnership: 90% of income from government
  • East Cascades Workforce Investment Board: 86% of income from government
  • Oregon Manufacturing Extension Partnership Inc: 83% of income from government
  • Pearl Buck Center Incorporated: 76% of income from government
  • Regional Accelerator & Innovation Network: 20% of income from government
  • Looking Glass Community Services: 18% of income from government
  • Connected Lane County: 17% of income from government
  • Bohemia Food Hub: 12% of income from government
  • Nurturely: 10% of income from government
  • Sponsors Inc: 8% of income from government
  • Food for Lane County: 5% of income from government
  • Onward Eugene: 1% of income from government
  • The Reveille Foundation: 0% of income from government
  • Collaborative Economic Development: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
6get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
5rely 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 57 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Lane Workforce Partnership’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