Skip to content
Plinth

· Private foundation

Laura D Wanser Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$31k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Human Services$63kInternational$55kRecreation & Sports$35kFood & Nutrition$33kHealth$20kEmployment$17kAnimals$6kPhilanthropy$2k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k9 grants · $21k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$2,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$588k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GALES CREEK CAMP FOUNDATION$10,000
TEAM RUBICON$3,000
CALL TO SAFETY$2,500
CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES$2,500
CASA OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY$2,500
HUNGER FIGHTERS OREGON$2,500
SALVATION ARMY WEST WOMEN'S AND CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION$2,500
LAKE OSWEGO MEALS NETWORK$2,500
DRESS FOR SUCCESS$2,000
AFRICA BRIDGE$1,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY17–25, $37k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 45% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%DRESS FOR SUCCESS: $3k → 12%DRESS FOR SUCCESS: $2k → 12%DRESS FOR SUCCESS: $2k → 12%DRESS FOR SUCCESS: $2k → 12%DRESS FOR SUCCESS: $2k → 12%DRESS FOR SUCCESS: $2k → 12%DRESS FOR SUCCESS: $2k → 12%DRESS FOR SUCCESS: $1k → 12%DRESS FOR SUCCESS: $1k → 12%CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $3k → 8%CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $3k → 8%CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $3k → 8%CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $3k → 8%CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $3k → 8%CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $3k → 8%CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $3k → 8%CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $1k → 8%CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $1k → 8%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$226k · 14 repeat orgs$4k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships — 10 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
2

Total granted

$226k
$4k

Still filing today

79%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
Human ServicesCrime & LegalRecreation & SportsHealthPublic Safety & DisasterFood & NutritionOther

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

  • GC
    GALES CREEK CAMP FOUNDATION
    3× · 2023–2025 · $35k · revenue +41%
  • LO
    LAKE OSWEGO ROTARY FOUNDATION INC
    5× · 2017–2022 · $30k · revenue +62%
  • CW
    CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES
    9× · 2017–2025 · $20k · revenue +326%

Funded once

  • SV
    SEDONA VILLAGE ROTARY CHARITABLE FUND
    one grant, 2024 · $2k
  • LO
    LAKE OSWEGO MEAL NETWORK
    one grant, 2017 · $2k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Womenspace

Our mission is to protect, shelter, and empower survivors of domestic violence - offering safety, support, and resources with compassion and trauma-informed care.

Human Services
2
Safety Compass

The organization's mission is to offer support for survivors of commercial sexual exploitation and human trafficking, navigating the criminal and social justice systems in the northwest region of oregon.

Human Services
3
Chances & Changes Inc

To operate residential and non-residential programs for victims of domestic violence.

4
Chaves County Casa Program

To provide needed services for abused, neglected, and vulnerable children and their families.

Human Services
5
Court Appointed Special Advocates of San Luis Obispo County Inc

The mission of San Luis Obispo CASA (SLO CASA) is to advocate for the best interests of abused and neglected children within the dependency court system. CASA recruits, trains, and supervises volunteers who advocate for this vulnerable…

Civil Rights
6
The District of Columbia Children's Advocacy Center

Safe shores provides survivor-centered intervention, hope and healing for children and families affected by abuse, trauma and violence in the district of columbia, and works to prevent and end child abuse and neglect through promising…

Crime & Legal
7
Safehouse Denver Inc

Safehouse denver assists adult, children, and youth in reclaiming their right to a life free from domestic violence. the agency provides a broad spectrum of culturally competent, trauma-informed services, including but not limited to,…

Human Services
8
Lake County Crisis Center

A safe place is the leading advocate for eliminating domestic violence & human trafficking in northern illinois.

9
Oregon Casa Network

To lead oregon's casa programs to provide a strong voice for every abused and neglected child

Human Services
10
Casa de Esperanza

Casa is a refuge, providing protection and education for people caught in the cylces of domestic violence, sexual assault and child assault. Casa is a healing community where women and children can receive the nurturing and support…

Human Services
11
Court Appointed Special Advocates of Bastrop Count

The organization recruits, trains, and supervises volunteers who provide advocacy services to child victims removed by the state from homes because of abuse or neglect

Civil Rights
12
Casa of Rock County Inc

Our mission is to recruit, train and supervise community volunteers to advocate for the best interest of children who have experienced abuse and/or neglect.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Call to Safety and the most unlike its peers is Project Pooch. 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

11 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 16 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
9/11
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

LAKE OSWEGO ROTARY FOUNDATION INC — $30,000 · OtherLAKE OSWEGO ROTARY FOUNDATION IN…LAKE OSWEGO MEALS NETWORK — $18,500 · OtherLAKE OSWEGO MEALS NETWORKSALVATION ARMY WEST WOMEN'S AND CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION — $11,500 · OtherSALVATION ARMY WEST WOMEN'S AND …+3 more — $6,000 · Other+3 moreCLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES — $20,300 · Human ServicesCLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICESCALL TO SAFETY — $17,000 · Human ServicesCALL TO SAFETYDress for Success Oregon — $16,500 · Human ServicesDress for Success OregonGALES CREEK CAMP FOUNDATION — $35,000 · Recreation & SportsGALES CREEK CAMP …CHILDREN'S NURSING SPECIALTIES INC — $19,500 · HealthCHILDREN'…CASA OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY — $12,500 · Crime & LegalCASA OF C…PROJECT POOCH — $6,000 · Crime & LegalPROJECT P…TEAM RUBICON INC — $16,000 · Public Safety & DisasterHUNGER FIGHTERS OREGON — $12,500 · Food & NutritionAFRICA BRIDGE — $9,000 · International
Other$66,000Human Services$53,800Recreation & Sports$35,000Health$19,500Crime & Legal$18,500Public Safety & Disaster$16,000Food & Nutrition$12,500International$9,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetGALES CREEK CAMP FOUNDATION — $35,000 over 3y, 2.6% of budgetLAKE OSWEGO ROTARY FOUNDATION INC — $30,000 over 5y, 3.6% of budgetCLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES — $20,300 over 9y, 0.1% of budgetCHILDREN'S NURSING SPECIALTIES INC — $19,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetCALL TO SAFETY — $17,000 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetDress for Success Oregon — $16,500 over 9y, 0.3% of budgetTEAM RUBICON INC — $16,000 over 7y, 0.0% of budgetHUNGER FIGHTERS OREGON — $12,500 over 5y, 1.9% of budgetCASA OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY — $12,500 over 6y, 0.3% of budgetAFRICA BRIDGE — $9,000 over 6y, 0.8% of budget
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 GALES CREEK CAMP FOUNDATION
  • Who funds LAKE OSWEGO ROTARY FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES
  • Who funds CHILDREN'S NURSING SPECIALTIES INC
  • Who funds CALL TO SAFETY
  • Who funds Dress for Success Oregon
  • Who funds TEAM RUBICON INC
  • Who funds HUNGER FIGHTERS OREGON
  • Who funds CASA OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY
  • Who funds AFRICA BRIDGE
  • Who funds PROJECT POOCH

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.

The Oregon Community FoundationOR20.4× affinity8 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Oregon Community Foundation · OCF Joseph E Weston Public Foundation · Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation Trust · The Robert D and Marcia H Randall Charitable Trust · The Harold & Arlene Schnitzer Care Foundation · Juan Young Trust · The Autzen Foundation · The Jackson Foundation · The Collins Foundation · Hillman Family Foundations · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc

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 Laura D Wanser 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 60%0%1%3%5%your share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 33%
  • Call to Safety61% of income from government
  • Clackamas Women's Services33% of income from government
  • Casa of Clackamas County0% 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)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

05Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Laura D Wanser Foundation?

Find your warmest path to Laura D Wanser 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 directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 16 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph