Skip to content
Oregon Ranked Choice Voting Advocates at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Oregon Ranked Choice Voting Advocates

The primary mission of OREGON RANKED CHOICE VOTING ADVOCATES (or-rcv) is to educate oregonians and the greater public about how government can better reflect the views and diversity of society through innovations in voting and elections.

$286k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$84k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
04Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Public Benefit$208kCivil Rights$149kArts & Culture$60kHuman Services$25kCommunity Improvement$20kYouth Development$10k
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 7 grants below total $269,250, the rows itemized in this filing. The $286,001 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $16,751 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–50k4 grants · $70k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $199k
$25,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$32k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BUILDING POWER FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR$84,000
NEXT UP ACTION FUND$65,000
APANO$50,250
URBAN LEAGUE$25,000
EAST COUNTY RISING$20,000
DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF OREGON$15,000
CENTRO$10,000
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 (FY24–24, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%URBAN LEAGUE: $25k → 12%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 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
Oregon Progress Forum

Next up amplifies the voice and leadership of diverse young people to achieve a more just and equitable oregon.

Environment
2
North Star Collaborative Foundation
Philanthropy
3
Northwest Progressive Institute

The Northwest Progressive Institute is a social welfare organization working to raise everyone's equality of life through insightful research and imaginative advocacy. NPI's projects and publications promote policy development based on…

Civil Rights
4
Unite Oregon Action

unite oregon action works across urban and rural divides to build a unified political, intercultural movement for justice in oregon. we are led by people of color, immigrants and refugees, rural communities, and people experiencing poverty.

—
5
Center for Intercultural Organizing

Center for intercultural organizing dba unite oregon is a diverse, grassroots organization working to build a multicultural movement for immigrant and refugee rights through education, civic engagement, community organizing and…

Civil Rights
6
Pueblo Unido Pdx

Connect immigrants to legal, social, and interpretation services.

Human Services
7
Oregon Center for Public Policy

The oregon center for public policy's mission is to achieve economic justice for all oregonians through research, analysis, and advocacy. ocpp works to change policies that foster economic security and stability for all oregonians. we do…

Employment
8
Our Oregon

Promote economic and social fairness by working in coalition open a broad range of issues and activities in the public arena

Human Services
9
Neighborhood Partnerships Inc

See schedule oneighborhood partnerships, inc. (np or the organization) is an oregon non-profit corporation founded in 1989 whose mission is to help create a better oregon, one in which we all have access to opportunity, stability, and what…

Philanthropy
10
Eugene-Springfield Solidarity Network

To provide assistance and awareness of oregon jobs

Civil Rights
11
Iaf Northwest

In 2024, IAF Pacific continued its work of connecting and strengthening broad-based alliances throughout the Pacific region.Through its Building Partnerships for Collaborative Action initiativethe organization supported Indigenous and…

Community Improvement
12
Oregon Energy Systems Technology and Research
Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Apano Communities United Fund; the most unlike its peers is Portlanders for Charter Reform. 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 12 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/10
Grantees still filing
6/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Portlanders for Charter Reform: $156,000 · OtherPortlanders for Charter ReformNEXT UP ACTION FUND: $65,000 · OtherNEXT UP ACTION FUNDDEMOCRATIC PARTY OF OREGON: $15,000 · OtherDEMOCRATIC PARTY OF OREGONAPANO COMMUNITIES UNITED FUND: $10,000 · OtherCENTRO CULTURAL OF WASHINGTON COUNTY: $10,000 · OtherBUILDING POWER FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR: $84,000 · Civil RightsBUILDING POWER FOR COMMU…NEW PROGRESSIVE NETWORK: $20,000 · Civil RightsNEW PROGRESSIVE NETWORKAPANO: $50,250 · Arts & CultureAPANOURBAN LEAGUE OF PORTLAND INC: $25,000 · Human ServicesEAST COUNTY RISING COMMUNITY PROJECTS: $20,000 · Public BenefitNATIVE AMERICAN YOUTH AND FAMILY CENTER: $10,000 · Youth DevelopmentNorth Star Action Center: $6,700 · Community Improvement
Other$256,000Civil Rights$104,000Arts & Culture$50,250Human Services$25,000Public Benefit$20,000Youth Development$10,000Community Improvement$6,700

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetPortlanders for Charter Reform: $156,000 over 1y, 18% of budgetBUILDING POWER FOR COMMUNITIES OF COLOR: $84,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetAPANO: $50,250 over 1y, 14% of budgetURBAN LEAGUE OF PORTLAND INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNEW PROGRESSIVE NETWORK: $20,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetEAST COUNTY RISING COMMUNITY PROJECTS: $20,000 over 1y, 3.5% of budgetNATIVE AMERICAN YOUTH AND FAMILY CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetAPANO COMMUNITIES UNITED FUND: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetCENTRO CULTURAL OF WASHINGTON COUNTY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNorth Star Action Center: $6,700 over 1y, 9.2% 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.

Northwest Health Foun…Northwest Health Foun…Seeding JusticeUnited Way of the Col…Service Employees Int…The Collins FoundationMeyer Memorial TrustThe Oregon Community …
Northwest Health FoundationOR20× affinity7 shared granteesties to 7 of 7Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Northwest Health Foundation · Northwest Health Foundation Fund II · Seeding Justice · United Way of the Columbia-Willamette · Service Employees International Union · The Collins Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · The Oregon Community 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 Oregon Ranked Choice Voting Advocates funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Oregon Ranked Choice Voting Advocates. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 50%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from government →median 23%
  • Urban League of Portland Inc: 33% of income from government
  • Native American Youth and Family Center: 23% of income from government
  • Centro Cultural of Washington County: 0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
5get no government money at all
1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
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.
04Through Plinth

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

How do I get to Oregon Ranked Choice Voting Advocates?

Find your warmest path to Oregon Ranked Choice Voting Advocates 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 12 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.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on Oregon Ranked Choice Voting Advocates’ 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