· Public charity
Oregon Manufacturing Extension Partnership Inc
Assist oregon manufacturing businesses with the implementation of advanced manufacturing practices.
What you funded, over time
By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).
A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 75% of Oregon Manufacturing Extension Partnership Inc’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY | $153,208 |
| UNIVERSITY OF NEVADA | $100,000 |
| CMTC | $65,014 |
| BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY | $52,473 |
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 (FY20–21, $27k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +22% since the first grant, against +20% for the ones you funded once.
11 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 8 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
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 FY2025, 82% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $65k 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
- ITINDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE2× · 2020–2021 · $359k · revenue +28%
- MAMANUFACTURING ADVOCACY & GROWTH NETWORK INC2× · 2020–2021 · $192k · revenue +8%
- SCSouth Carolina Manufacturing Extension Partnership2× · 2020–2021 · $61k · revenue +22%
Funded once
- WIWorksystems Incone grant, 2017 · $163k · revenue +20%
- NMNEW MEXICO MANUFACTURING EXTENSION PARTNERSHIPone grant, 2021 · $31k · revenue +7%
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.
Accelerating manufacturing excellence.
Strengthen manufacturers competitiveness by enhancing productivity, performance and profitability. as a trusted advisor to new jersey manufacturers, we leverage our staff and resources to help identify areas of improvement and streamline…
The wcmp will grow and nurture the mep's impact in the state of wisconsin by engaging and aligning the best possible resources to help small and medium-sized manufacturers reach their potential.
Impact washington is a non-profit organization whose mission is to support and energize our local industry by enhancing the research and innovation, productivity, and technology performance of washington state manufacturers. we support…
To promote economic growth and job creation through applied research, technology transfer, and productive development.
Furtherance of the dept of commerce nist mep program
Catalyst connection is an economic development organization whose mission is to advance the performance of small and medium-sized manufacturing companies in southwestern pennsylvania by accelerating their growth and productivity…
In its oversight, management and support role, the corporation shall: (a) manage and provide oversight and support of the national center for defense manufacturing and machining and advanced manufacturing international, inc.; (b) oversee…
The purpose of dakota mep is to increase the competitiveness of manufacturing companies, other new wealth creating companies and related idustries that impact such enterprises, in order to strengthen our country's economic vitality.
To improve the productivity and technological performance of small- and medium-sized manufacturers throughout the state of florida by providing business assessments, business networks, leadership and workforce training, and in-plant…
Assist oregon manufacturing businesses with the implementation of advanced manufacturing practices.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Mexico Manufacturing Extension Partnership and the most unlike its peers is Worksystems Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
9 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. 9 of the 14 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 INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds New York City Industrial Technology Assistance Corporation ↗
- Who funds MANUFACTURING ADVOCACY & GROWTH NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds Worksystems Inc ↗
- Who funds CALIFORNIA MANUFACTURING TECHNOLOGY CONSULTING ↗
- Who funds South Carolina Manufacturing Extension Partnership ↗
- Who funds DELAWARE VALLEY INDUSTRIAL RESOURCE CENTER ↗
- Who funds NEW MEXICO MANUFACTURING EXTENSION PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds ILLINOIS MANUFACTURING EXCELLENCE CENTER ↗
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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.
Open a dossier: Pa Irc Network Foundation
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 Oregon Manufacturing Extension Partnership Inc 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Worksystems Inc — 55% 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.