Skip to content

· Private foundation

Noble B Goettel Charitable Trust

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$22k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$22k
Largest
01What it funds
0186% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Education$85kFood & Nutrition$31kHuman Services$20kYouth Development$18kCrime & Legal$14kMembership Benefit$7kHealth$2kArts & Culture$1kOther$0
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$22,087
Median grant
1
States reached
$542k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UMPQUA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION$22,087
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 (FY19–22, $21k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%FAMILY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $5k → 17%THE FISH OF ROSEBURG: $4k → 17%FAMILY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $4k → 17%THE FISH OF ROSEBURG: $4k → 17%THE FISH OF ROSEBURG: $2k → 17%THE FISH OF ROSEBURG: $2k → 17%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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$167k · 12 repeat orgs$33k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +100% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

12 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 11 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

12
14

Total granted

$167k
$33k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+100%
+13%

Still filing today

58%
21%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

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

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

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesFood & NutritionCivil RightsRecreation & SportsEducationArts & CultureOther
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

  • UC
    UMPQUA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION
    5× · 2020–2025 · $62k · revenue +141%
  • BG
    BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE UMPQUA VALLEY INC
    3× · 2019–2023 · $12k · revenue +42%
  • TF
    THE FISH OF ROSEBURG
    4× · 2019–2022 · $12k · revenue +100%

Funded once

  • BA
    BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF
    one grant, 2017 · $6k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
  • YO
    YMCAASSOCIATION OF DOUGLAS COUNTY
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
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
Cobb Children's Learning Center

To ensure equitable access to high-quality care and early education for douglas county, oregon families.

Education
2
Adams County Children's Advocacy Center

To meet the needs of children and families in our community by providing a community based, child focused center that facilitates a compassionate multidisciplinary approach to the prevention, identification, investigation, prosecution and…

Crime & Legal
3
Family & Children's Council of Black Hawk County

To prevent child abuse and strengthen families.

Crime & Legal
4
Douglas County Farm Bureau

Work to improve the economic well-being of agriculture and enrich the quality of farm family

—
5
Citizens Utility Board

As directed by oregon voters in 1984, the oregon citizens' utility board (cub) represents the interests of oregon's residential utility customers before administrative, judicial, and legislative bodies. cub works at the intersection of…

—
6
Morgan County Child Advocacy Center

To provide a safe caring place to evaluate any child who may have been abused

Crime & Legal
7
Upvalley Family Centers of Napa County

The mission of the UpValley Family Centers is to provide guidance, support and resources in the community, in the home and for the individual so that everyone can achieve a better life. We serve youth, adults and families in the…

Human Services
8
Umpqua Actors Community Theatre

To provide opportunity for community participation in live theatre productions. provide education to children and adults in the aspects of the theatre.

Arts & Culture
9
Webster City Day Care

Child day care center

—
10
Child Advocacy Center of Coos County

To protect children, support families, and bring hope and healing through compassionate, coordinated, and child-centered advocacy, through specialized programs and services, such as multi-disciplinary team coordination, forensic…

Crime & Legal
11
United Children's Services of Bennington County Inc

Children's services

Human Services
12
Oregon Child Development Coalition

Oregon child development coalition is dedicated to improving the lives of children and families by providing early childhood education, care and advocacy with unique and supportive services to enhance family growth and community success.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Douglas County Children's Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is The Friendly Kitchen. 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

10 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. 10 of the 26 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
9/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

UMPQUA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $61,505 · OtherUMPQUA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATIONIndividual grant recipient: $17,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientAMERICAN LEGION UMPQUA POST #16: $11,700 · OtherAMERICAN LEGION UMPQUA POST #16BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF: $6,084 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $5,000 · OtherYMCAASSOCIATION OF DOUGLAS COUNTY: $5,000 · OtherPROJECT BLESSING FOOD PANTRY: $5,000 · OtherRIDDLE CITY LIBRARY: $5,000 · OtherGLENDALE COMMUNITY LIBRARY: $4,500 · Other+9 more: $13,271 · Other+9 moreTHE FISH OF ROSEBURG: $11,751 · Human ServicesTHE FISH OF…FAMILY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $8,882 · Human ServicesFAMILY DEVE…CASA OF DOUGLAS COUNTY INC: $13,907 · Civil RightsBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE UMPQUA VALLEY INC: $11,956 · Recreation & SportsTHE FRIENDLY KITCHEN: $9,500 · Food & NutritionDOUGLAS COUNTY CHILDREN'S CENTER INC: $6,025 · Crime & LegalSMART READING: $2,994 · EducationUMPQUA VALLEY ARTS ASSOCIATION: $1,000 · Arts & Culture
Other$134,060Human Services$20,633Civil Rights$13,907Recreation & Sports$11,956Food & Nutrition$9,500Crime & Legal$6,025Education$2,994Arts & Culture$1,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetUMPQUA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $61,505 over 5y, 1.2% of budgetCASA OF DOUGLAS COUNTY INC: $13,907 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE UMPQUA VALLEY INC: $11,956 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetTHE FISH OF ROSEBURG: $11,751 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetTHE FRIENDLY KITCHEN: $9,500 over 4y, 0.8% of budgetFAMILY DEVELOPMENT CENTER: $8,882 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetDOUGLAS COUNTY CHILDREN'S CENTER INC: $6,025 over 2y, 0.3% of budgetMERCY FOUNDATION INC: $2,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUMPQUA VALLEY ARTS ASSOCIATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% 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 UMPQUA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CASA OF DOUGLAS COUNTY INC ↗
  • Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE UMPQUA VALLEY INC ↗
  • Who funds THE FISH OF ROSEBURG ↗
  • Who funds THE FRIENDLY KITCHEN ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY DEVELOPMENT CENTER ↗
  • Who funds DOUGLAS COUNTY CHILDREN'S CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds SMART READING ↗
  • Who funds MERCY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds UMPQUA VALLEY ARTS ASSOCIATION ↗

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 Ford Family FoundationOR25.6× affinity10 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Ford Family Foundation · The Oregon Community Foundation · John & Jean Loosley Charitable Foundation · Hunt C Giles Char - Main · The Roundhouse Foundation · The Autzen Foundation · Briggs Loosley Foundation · Hanna Family Perpetual Foundation · The Bluestone Foundation · The Avista Foundation · Greater Douglas United Way · Umpqua Bank 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 Noble B Goettel Charitable Trust funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Noble B Goettel Charitable Trust. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%19%38%56%75%share of the org’s income from government →median 3%
  • Family Development Center: 71% of income from government
  • Douglas County Children's Center Inc: 24% of income from government
  • Smart Reading: 3% of income from government
  • Umpqua Valley Arts Association: 1% of income from government
  • Casa of Douglas County Inc: 1% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
1get no government money at all
4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
1rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–75%
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 26 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Noble B Goettel’s filings →

More from the funding graph