· Private foundation
R & M Clark Family Foundation
Its FY2025 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 FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k48 grants · $195k
- $10k–50k7 grants · $105k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Individual grant recipient | $25,000 |
| BIG BROTHERSBIG SISTERS | $20,000 |
| ALZHEIMER'S ASSOCIATION | $20,000 |
| EASTERN LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT | $10,000 |
| LIVING WELL DISABILITY SERVICES | $10,000 |
| DEPAUW UNIVERSITY | $10,000 |
| PORT WASHINGTON MEDICAL CLINIC | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $8,000 |
| MEETINGHOUSE CHURCH | $8,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $8,000 |
| DRURY UNIVERSITY | $7,500 |
| COURAGEOUS KIDS | $7,500 |
| LARRY'S KIDS FOUNDATION | $7,000 |
| GOOD EATS FOR LIFE | $6,500 |
| AMERICA RED CROSS SW OREGON CHAPTER) | $6,500 |
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 (FY20–25, $138k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 78% 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.
68 repeat relationships — 50 still active in FY2025, 18 since wound down; 4 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, 90% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k 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
- LWLiving Well Disability Services6× · 2020–2025 · $75k · revenue +42%
DePauw University6× · 2020–2025 · $55k · revenue +55%- DUDrury University6× · 2020–2025 · $53k · revenue +11%
Funded once
- ANAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branchesgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $6k · revenue +27%
- MMILES4MIGRANTSone grant, 2021 · $6k · revenue -79%
- DRDESCHUTES RIVER ALLIANCEgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $5k · revenue +55%
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.
Lifeworks' mission is to partner with people with disabilities to drive change by increasing opportunity and access in the community.
Providing innovative and life-enriching services for children, adolescents, and adults with disabilities.
Witnessing to god's love for all people, we stand with and advocate for migrants and refugees, transforming communities through ministries of service and justice.
Our mission is to break the cycle of addiction and trauma for women, children, and families.
Familylinks is one of the pittsburgh area's largest and most comprehensive human service providers. serving the most vulnerable members of our community, familylinks provides services in mental health, substance use, service coordination,…
Believing in the value of every life, mary's path empowers vulnerable teen mothers in foster care and their babies to create lives of dignity, hope and self-sufficiency.
We partner with children and adults with disabilities and their families so they may live more meaningful, healthy, and independent lives in their homes and communities.
To help vulnerable children and their families build permanent, positive change.
Provides person-centered and inclusive services to children and adults with and without disabilities that includes securing employment, connecting to necessary supportive services, accessing housing and participating fully as contributing…
Lifestream, inc. (the organization") provides community-based services that support individuals in attaining greater independence, promising opportunities, and lives that are meaningful and fulfilling on their own terms.
Our mission is to break the cycle of child abuse by empowering children, families and communities.
To provide rehabilitative housing services and support to help people with psychiatric disabilities reintegrate into the community.the agency provides rehabilitative housing services and staff support as a primary mechanism for achieving…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Eugene Mission Inc and the most unlike its peers is Good Eats for Life Llc. 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 31 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) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 3% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
57 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. 57 of the 93 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 Living Well Disability Services ↗
- Who funds DePauw University ↗
- Who funds Drury University ↗
- Who funds GARY SINISE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds EUGENE MISSION INC ↗
- Who funds Bridging Inc ↗
- Who funds RELIEF NURSERY INC ↗
- Who funds MAINE PAWS FOR VETERANS INC ↗
- Who funds STEPHEN SILLER TUNNEL TO TOWERS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds FOOD FOR LANE COUNTY ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE CHILD ADVOCACY CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds PARENTING NOW ↗
- Who funds School Garden Project of Lane County ↗
- Who funds LICKING COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE & RELATED DISORDERS ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds BOYS AND GIRLS CLUBS OF EMERALD VALLEY ↗
- Who funds SHELTERCARE ↗
- Who funds TRAVIS MILLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Guild ↗
- Who funds WOMENSPACE ↗
- Who funds WORLD VISION INC ↗
- Who funds Bridgeway House ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds DIAPER BANK OF NORTH CAROLINA ↗
- Who funds YOUTH FRONTIERS INC ↗
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: Chambers Family Foundation · The Woodard Family Foundation · The Oregon Community Foundation · McKay Family Foundation · The Ford Family Foundation · The Autzen Foundation · United Way of Lane County · Ima Foundation · Reed Family Foundation Inc · Lane Community Health Council · Pacificsource Foundation for Health Improvement · Braemar Charitable 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 R & M Clark Family 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.
- Womenspace — 62% of income from government
- Friends of the Child Advocacy Center Inc — 33% of income from government
- Relief Nursery Inc — 30% of income from government
- White Bird Clinic — 29% of income from government
- Ophelia's Place — 22% of income from government
- Looking Glass Community Services — 18% of income from government
- Sheltercare — 18% of income from government
- Boys and Girls Clubs of Emerald Valley — 15% of income from government
- School Garden Project of Lane County — 9% of income from government
- McKenzie River Trust — 8% of income from government
- Food for Lane County — 5% of income from government
- Parenting Now — 1% of income from government
- Jasper Mountain — 0% of income from government
- Global Empowerment Mission 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 R & M Clark Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to R & M Clark Family 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.