Skip to content

· Private foundation

Laura D Wanser Foundation

Its FY2026 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$36k
Granted FY2026still arriving
11
Grants FY2026still arriving
2
States reached
$10k
Largest
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.

Human Services$63kInternational$55kRecreation & Sports$35kFood & Nutrition$33kHealth$20kEmployment$17kAnimals$6kPhilanthropy$2k
02FY2026 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2026

  • Under $10k10 grants · $26k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$2,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$627k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GALES CREEK CAMP FOUNDATION$10,000
LAKE OSWEGO ROTARY FOUNDATION$5,000
TEAM RUBICON$3,000
LAKE OSWEGO MEALS NETWORK$2,500
SALVATION ARMY WEST WOMEN'S AND CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION$2,500
CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES$2,500
CALL TO SAFETY$2,500
CASA OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY$2,500
AFRICA BRIDGE$2,000
DRESS FOR SUCCESS$2,000
HUNGER FIGHTERS OREGON$1,500
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 (FY17–26, $41k) 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. Its 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: $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: $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
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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$262k · 14 repeat orgs$4k to everyone else

14 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2026, 3 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

14
2

Total granted

$262k
$4k

Still filing today

79%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2026, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25’26
Human ServicesCrime & LegalRecreation & SportsHealthPublic Safety & DisasterFood & 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

  • GC
    GALES CREEK CAMP FOUNDATION
    4× · 2023–2026 · $45k · revenue +41%
  • LO
    LAKE OSWEGO ROTARY FOUNDATION INC
    6× · 2017–2026 · $35k · revenue +62%
  • CW
    CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES
    10× · 2017–2026 · $23k · revenue +326%

Funded once

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

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

Human Services
4
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
5
Sexual Assault Support Services

To create opportunities for survivors of sexual violence and their supporters to find healing, justice, and liberation. We support people who have experienced sexual violence in any form, including intimate partner violence, family…

Health
6
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
7
Chaves County Casa Program

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

Human Services
8
Chances & Changes Inc

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

—
9
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
10
Connecticut Court Appointed Special Advocates Inc

Empower a statewide network of caring, consistent volunteer court appointed special advocates to advance the best interests of children who have experienced abuse or neglect so every child can find a safe, permanent home to thrive.

Crime & Legal
11
Tessa

To provide confidential programs that empower victims of domestic violence, dating violence, intimate partner stalking, sexual assault and/or human trafficking in el paso, teller, and douglas counties (continued on sch o)(continued) we…

Human Services
12
Oregon Child Abuse Solutions

To ensure children and youth in oregon have access to high quality, comprehensive services and resources to address child abuse.

Crime & Legal
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Call to Safety; 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, 2017–2026.

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 2026, 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.

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

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

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

LAKE OSWEGO ROTARY FOUNDATION INC: $35,000 · OtherLAKE OSWEGO ROTARY FOUNDATION IN…LAKE OSWEGO MEALS NETWORK: $21,000 · OtherLAKE OSWEGO MEALS NETWORKSALVATION ARMY WEST WOMEN'S AND CHILDREN'S FOUNDATION: $14,000 · OtherSALVATION ARMY WEST WOMEN'S AND …+3 more: $6,000 · Other+3 moreCLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $22,800 · Human ServicesCLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICE…CALL TO SAFETY: $19,500 · Human ServicesCALL TO SAFETYDress for Success Oregon: $18,500 · Human ServicesDress for Success OregonGALES CREEK CAMP FOUNDATION: $45,000 · Recreation & SportsGALES CREEK CAMP FO…CASA OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY: $15,000 · Crime & LegalPROJECT POOCH: $6,000 · Crime & LegalCHILDREN'S NURSING SPECIALTIES INC: $19,500 · HealthTEAM RUBICON INC: $19,000 · Public Safety & DisasterHUNGER FIGHTERS OREGON: $14,000 · Food & NutritionAFRICA BRIDGE: $11,000 · International
Other$76,000Human Services$60,800Recreation & Sports$45,000Crime & Legal$21,000Health$19,500Public Safety & Disaster$19,000Food & Nutrition$14,000International$11,000

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 budgetGALES CREEK CAMP FOUNDATION: $45,000 over 4y, 2.6% of budgetLAKE OSWEGO ROTARY FOUNDATION INC: $35,000 over 6y, 3.6% of budgetCLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES: $22,800 over 10y, 0.1% of budgetCALL TO SAFETY: $19,500 over 10y, 0.3% of budgetCHILDREN'S NURSING SPECIALTIES INC: $19,500 over 6y, 0.1% of budgetTEAM RUBICON INC: $19,000 over 8y, 0.0% of budgetDress for Success Oregon: $18,500 over 10y, 0.3% of budgetCASA OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY: $15,000 over 7y, 0.3% of budgetHUNGER FIGHTERS OREGON: $14,000 over 6y, 1.9% of budgetAFRICA BRIDGE: $11,000 over 7y, 0.8% 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 GALES CREEK CAMP FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds LAKE OSWEGO ROTARY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds CLACKAMAS WOMEN'S SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds CALL TO SAFETY ↗
  • Who funds CHILDREN'S NURSING SPECIALTIES INC ↗
  • Who funds TEAM RUBICON INC ↗
  • Who funds Dress for Success Oregon ↗
  • Who funds CASA OF CLACKAMAS COUNTY ↗
  • Who funds HUNGER FIGHTERS OREGON ↗
  • Who funds AFRICA BRIDGE ↗
  • Who funds PROJECT POOCH ↗

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 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

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 Laura D Wanser Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Laura D Wanser Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 60%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 33%
  • Call to Safety: 61% of income from government
  • Clackamas Women's Services: 33% of income from government
  • Casa of Clackamas County: 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)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–90%
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 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 16 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 2026, released 2026. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Laura D Wanser’s filings →

More from the funding graph