· Private foundation
Leupold & Stevens 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.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k15 grants · $106k
- $10k–50k16 grants · $229k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $90k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| ELITE SPORTS ACADEMY | $89,500 |
| PATH HOME (PORTLAND HOMELESS FAM) | $18,500 |
| PORTLAND YOUTH PHILHARMONIC | $17,856 |
| DUCKS UNLIMITED - PORTLAND PROJECTS | $17,100 |
| RETURNING VETERANS PROJECT | $16,730 |
| OREGON HUNTERS ASSOCIATION | $16,500 |
| HOLLA | $16,354 |
| OMSI | $15,770 |
| OREGON DESERT LAND TRUST | $15,000 |
| ELITE SPORTS ACADEMY | $14,500 |
| NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES | $13,250 |
| BOYS & GIRLS CLUB - CORVALLIS | $12,104 |
| AUDUBON SOCIETY OF PORTLAND | $11,854 |
| NORTH COAST LAND CONSERVANCY | $11,175 |
| Individual grant recipient | $11,100 |
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 (FY17–24, $55k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 100% 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.
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.
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.
44 repeat relationships — 30 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down.
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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 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
BIRD ALLIANCE OF OREGON INC7× · 2018–2024 · $209k · revenue +46%- ESElite Sports Academy8× · 2017–2024 · $207k · revenue +248% · 38% of their budget
Portland Youth Philharmonic Association8× · 2017–2024 · $186k · revenue +129%
Funded once
- CRCANBY ROD AND GUN CLUBgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $33k · revenue +116%
- BGBOY GIRLS CLUB CORVALLISone grant, 2021 · $18k
- EAEARTH AND SPIRT COUNCILone grant, 2017 · $16k
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.
Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.
To conserve and enhance land in southern oregon to sustain our human and natural communities forever.
Oregon Wild works to protect and restore Oregon's wildlands, wildlife and waters as an enduring legacy for future generations.
The Coast Fork Willamette Watershed Council is a local nonprofit organization that strives to enhance and restore habitat for fish and wildlife our community and for future generations. Our Board of Directors consists of seven members with…
Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
Nedc's mission is to work toward a future in which the pacific northwest leads the nation in developing, implementing & enforcing strong laws and regulations that protect the environment & human health, and where our governments &…
Portland Harbor Community Coalition (PHCC) organizes frontline groups and individuals to heal the water, land, and air in and around the Wa'lmaomt (Willamette River) federal Superfund area, polluted from over a century of heavy industrial…
Rogue Climate's mission is to empower Southern Oregon communities most impacted by climate change including low-income, rural, youth, seniors & communities of color, to win climate justice by organizing for clean energy, sustainable jobs &…
Founded in 1981, the wetlands conservancy is dedicated to working in partnership with communities statewide to permanently protect, conserve and restore oregon's greatest wetlands.
The council is organized to foster partnerships for clean water, healthy streams, and abundant fisheries in the Clackamas Watershed
Building a diverse grassroots movement to address the causes of climate disruption through justice-based solutions by inspiring, training and mobilizing people to act.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Deschutes Land Trust and the most unlike its peers is Wheel to Walk Foundation. 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 34 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) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
27 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. 27 of the 55 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
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 BIRD ALLIANCE OF OREGON INC ↗
- Who funds Elite Sports Academy ↗
- Who funds Portland Youth Philharmonic Association ↗
- Who funds HIGH DESERT PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds PATH HOME ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds RETURNING VETERANS PROJECT ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CORVALLIS INC ↗
- Who funds Friends of Trees ↗
- Who funds Deschutes Land Trust ↗
- Who funds OREGON PUBLIC BROADCASTING ↗
- Who funds Northeast Community Center ↗
- Who funds PORTLAND CENTER STAGE ↗
- Who funds OREGON DESERT LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds North Coast Land Conservancy Inc ↗
- Who funds Central City Concern ↗
- Who funds CENTER OF DESIGN FOR AN AGING SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds Oregon Environmental Council ↗
- Who funds HOLLA ↗
- Who funds CANBY ROD AND GUN CLUB ↗
- Who funds Opal Creek Ancient Forest Center ↗
- Who funds REACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INC ↗
- Who funds WARFIGHTER OUTFITTERS ↗
- Who funds COLUMBIA LAND TRUST ↗
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: The Oregon Community Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · Juan Young Trust · The Collins Foundation · Rose E Tucker Charitable Trust · The Jackson Foundation · The Autzen Foundation · Kohnstamm Family Foundation · Braemar Charitable Trust · Maybelle Clark Macdonald Fund · The Roundhouse Foundation · Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation 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 Leupold & Stevens 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.
- High Desert Partnership — 100% of income from government
- Friends of Trees — 100% of income from government
- Deschutes Land Trust — 46% of income from government
- Northwest Family Services — 35% of income from government
- Holla — 29% of income from government
- Reach Community Development Inc — 18% of income from government
- Boys & Girls Club of Corvallis Inc — 16% of income from government
- Central City Concern — 10% of income from government
- North Coast Land Conservancy Inc — 6% of income from government
- Canby Rod and Gun Club — 2% of income from government
- Portland Center Stage — 1% of income from government
- Oregon Public Broadcasting — 1% of income from government
- Portland Youth Philharmonic Association — 0% of income from government
- Bird Alliance of Oregon Inc — 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 Leupold & Stevens Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Leupold & Stevens 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.