Skip to content
Neighborimpact at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Neighborimpact

NEIGHBORIMPACT serves the economically disadvantaged of central oregon, including the warm springs indian reservation, with services that include: a regional food bank, head start program (preschool), energy assistance, weatherization, housing, shelter, home-ownership and preservation loans, support to childcare providers and a money…

$18M
Granted FY2024still arriving
6
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$159k
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, FY2017 to 2024.

Housing & Shelter$1.5MYouth Development$432kHuman Services$124kPhilanthropy$37kEducation$9k
02FY2024 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $421,016, the rows itemized in this filing. The $18,407,623 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $17,986,607 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $36k
  • $50k–250k4 grants · $386k
$79,503
Median grant
1
States reached
$34M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE BETHLEHEM INN$159,433
J BAR J YOUTH SERVICES$85,834
SAVING GRACE$79,503
SHEPHERD'S HOUSE MINISTRIES$60,746
THRIVE CENTRAL OREGON$20,000
CENTRAL OREGON VETERAN'S OUTREACH$15,500
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 (FY17–24, $515k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, 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%REDEMPTION HOUSE MINISTRIES: $68k → 11%REDEMPTION HOUSE MINISTRIES: $17k → 11%REDEMPTION HOUSE MINISTRIES: $15k → 11%REDEMPTION HOUSE MINISTRIES: $10k → 11%MT VIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: $48k → 10%THRIVE CENTRAL OREGON: $33k → 10%THRIVE CENTRAL OREGON: $20k → 10%THRIVE CENTRAL OREGON: $17k → 10%THRIVE CENTRAL OREGON: $16k → 10%THRIVE CENTRAL OREGON: $12k → 10%THRIVE CENTRAL OREGON: $3k → 10%SAVING GRACE: $80k → 10%SAVING GRACE: $51k → 10%SAVING GRACE: $22k → 10%SAVING GRACE: $20k → 10%REACH OUT NP: $19k → 10%SAVING GRACE: $18k → 10%SAVING GRACE: $17k → 10%SAVING GRACE: $16k → 10%SAVING GRACE: $15k → 10%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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$2.0M · 13 repeat orgs$67k to everyone else

13 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
3

Total granted

$2.0M
$67k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+85%
+110%

Still filing today

85%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterPhilanthropyEducationOther
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

  • BI
    BETHLEHEM INN
    9× · 2017–2025 · $566k · revenue +27%
  • J BAR J YOUTH SERVICES INC
    8× · 2017–2024 · $363k · revenue +76%
  • SH
    SHEPHERD'S HOUSE MINISTRIES
    3× · 2021–2024 · $357k · revenue +155%

Funded once

  • MV
    MOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $48k · revenue +110%
  • RO
    REACH OUT NPgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $19k · revenue +100%
  • TD
    THE DOOR AT THREE RIVERS INC
    one grant, 2022 · $459
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
Home Share Oregon

To connect homeowners with a spare bedroom to rent and home seekers in need of affordable housing

Housing & Shelter
2
Family Promise of Cowlitz County

To help families with children in our community who are situationally homeless achieve sustainable independence through a community based response by providing temporary housing, usually 60-90 days, along with case management.

Human Services
3
Outsiders Inn

Outsiders Inn (OI) provides peer-lead homeless services and operates multiple shelter programs with a recovery focused model in the Clark County, WA area.

Housing & Shelter
4
Restoration House Inc

Restoration House provides save, supervised housing for men with significant behavioral health needs, creating a stable environment where structure, accountability, and wraparound services support personal growth and long-term recovery.…

Health
5
Shelter House Community Shelter and Transition Services

Through shelter and housing, advocacy and supportive services, our mission is to prevent and end homelessness in our community.

—
6
Carry It Forward

The name "Carry It Forward" is meant to highlight the mutual benefits ofdirect service to our unhoused neighbors. Our work is designed to reducesuffering by meeting basic human needs while developing a sustainable modelfor incorporating…

Human Services
7
A New Beginning for Women and Children

We are a ministry that serves women and children who are homeless, who need accountability for sober living or who are recovering from domestic violencwe

Human Services
8
House of Hope

Assisting and housing females in recovery

—
9
Thrive Housing Network

Providing transitional housing and supportive services for vulnerable populations

Unclassified
10
Operation Nightwatch - Portland

Operation Nightwatch provides nighttime hospitality for Portland's unhoused population. For a few evenings a week, staff and volunteers at thehospitality center provide a safe place, food, socks, blankets, medical care, and welcome our…

Health
11
South Whidbey Homeless Coalition

We provide community members facing homlessness with chelter, resurces, and advoccy to create a strong and thriving widbey island.

Housing & Shelter
12
Eastern Oregon Health and Wellness Inc

Eastern oregon health & wellness provides recovery housing and outpatient services that support individuals and families impacted by substance use disorder through safe housing, trauma-informed care, and community-based support.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Central Oregon Veteran & Community Outreach Inc; the most unlike its peers is Reach Redmond. 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

15 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. 15 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)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/15
Grantees still filing
12/15
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

BETHLEHEM INN: $565,701 · Housing & ShelterBETHLEHEM INNSHEPHERD'S HOUSE MINISTRIES: $356,962 · Housing & ShelterSHEPHERD'S HOUSE MINISTRIESCENTRAL OREGON VETERAN & COMMUNITY OUTREACH INC: $105,375 · Housing & ShelterCENTRAL OREGON VETERAN & COMMUNITY OUTREACH INC+1 more: $20,000 · Housing & ShelterSAVING GRACE: $237,555 · Human ServicesSAVING GRACEREDEMPTION HOUSE MINISTRIES: $109,891 · Human ServicesREDEMPTION HOUSE MINISTRIESTHRIVE CENTRAL OREGON: $100,682 · Human ServicesTHRIVE CENTRAL OREGONMOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: $48,159 · Human ServicesMOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY DEV…REACH OUT NP: $18,654 · Human ServicesJ BAR J YOUTH SERVICES INC: $363,007 · OtherJ BAR J YOUTH SERVICES IN…REACH REDMOND: $68,609 · OtherREACH REDMONDUNITED WAY OF DESCHUTES COUNTY: $37,217 · OtherUNITED WAY OF DESCHUTES C…+2 more: $15,459 · OtherDAWNS HOUSE CORPORATION LLC: $58,583 · PhilanthropyJEFFERSON COUNTY FAITH BASED NETWORK: $9,400 · Education
Housing & Shelter$1,048,038Human Services$514,941Other$484,292Philanthropy$58,583Education$9,400

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 budgetBETHLEHEM INN: $565,701 over 9y, 7.3% of budgetJ BAR J YOUTH SERVICES INC: $363,007 over 8y, 0.7% of budgetSHEPHERD'S HOUSE MINISTRIES: $356,962 over 3y, 4.9% of budgetSAVING GRACE: $237,555 over 9y, 2.6% of budgetREDEMPTION HOUSE MINISTRIES: $109,891 over 4y, 18% of budgetCENTRAL OREGON VETERAN & COMMUNITY OUTREACH INC: $105,375 over 8y, 1.9% of budgetTHRIVE CENTRAL OREGON: $100,682 over 6y, 3.1% of budgetREACH REDMOND: $68,609 over 2y, 5.0% of budgetDAWNS HOUSE CORPORATION LLC: $58,583 over 3y, 7.3% of budgetMOUNTAIN VIEW COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: $48,159 over 1y, 13% of budgetUNITED WAY OF DESCHUTES COUNTY: $37,217 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetREACH OUT NP: $18,654 over 1y, 5.1% of budgetGRANDMAS HOUSE OF CENTRAL OREGON: $15,000 over 2y, 8.2% of budgetJEFFERSON COUNTY FAITH BASED NETWORK: $9,400 over 2y, 1.5% 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.

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 Deschut…St Charles Health Sys…The Oregon Community …Central Oregon Health…The Autzen FoundationThe Anjulicia Foundat…First Interstate Banc…Maybelle Clark Macdon…The Roundhouse Founda…The Collins FoundationCascade Heritage Foun…Tsutayo Ichioka & Sat…
United Way of Deschutes CountyOR28.4× affinity11 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of Deschutes County · St Charles Health System Inc · The Oregon Community Foundation · Central Oregon Health Council · The Autzen Foundation · The Anjulicia Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Maybelle Clark Macdonald Fund · The Roundhouse Foundation · The Collins Foundation · Cascade Heritage Foundation · Tsutayo Ichioka & Satsuki Nakao Charitable 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 Neighborimpact funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Neighborimpact. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 20%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%23%45%68%90%share of the org’s income from government →median 27%
  • J Bar J Youth Services Inc: 71% of income from government
  • Central Oregon Veteran & Community Outreach Inc: 51% of income from government
  • Saving Grace: 48% of income from government
  • Dawns House Corporation Llc: 27% of income from government
  • Redemption House Ministries: 14% of income from government
  • Thrive Central Oregon: 12% of income from government
  • Bethlehem Inn: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
2rely 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.

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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $20M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Neighborimpact’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