· Private foundation
Richard Robert Miselis Foundation
Its FY2024 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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k9 grants · $29k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $48k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA | $25,500 |
| TUFTS UNIVERSITY | $22,000 |
| WILD SALMON CENTER | $3,500 |
| OREGON FOOD BANK | $3,500 |
| FRIENDS OF THE HISTORIC COLUMBIA | $3,500 |
| COMMUNITY CYCLING CENTER | $3,500 |
| NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION | $3,500 |
| PACIFIC CREST TRAIL ASSOCIATION | $3,500 |
| COMMUNITY TRANSITIONAL SCHOOL | $3,500 |
| DESCHUTES RIVER ALLIANCE | $2,000 |
| OREGON HUMANE SOCIETY | $2,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 63% of your 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.
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 +24% since the first grant, against -65% for the ones you funded once.
9 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2024, 0 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 96% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $2k 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
Trustees of Tufts College7× · 2018–2024 · $85k · revenue +36%- FOFriends of the Historic Columbia River H5× · 2020–2024 · $12k · revenue +77%
- CCCOMMUNITY CYCLING CENTER4× · 2021–2024 · $10k · revenue +25%
Funded once
PROJECT HEALING WATERS FLY FISHING INCone grant, 2020 · $3k · revenue -65%- TUTufts University - Packard Societyone grant, 2017 · $3k
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.
To conserve functioning salmon/steelhead eco-system at watershed levels, integrate angling activities with basic scientific research, collect raw data, monitor environmental functions, salmon/steelhead population dynamics, public…
Western rivers conservancy's mission is to protect outstanding river ecosystems in the western united states. continued on schedule o.we acquire land to conserve critical habitat, provide public access for compatible use and enjoyment, and…
Wwt's mission is to protect and restore water in rivers and streams across washington state. washington water trust restores and protects water in rivers and streams and promotes sustainable freshwater management in washington, and, more…
Dedicated to protecting the world's natural environment on behalf of the public by serving as a public interest law firm. refer to schedule o, part iii, line 4a, for list of litigated cases or advocacy work.
Perc is dedicated to advancing conservation through markets, incentives, property rights, and partnerships.
Providing legal aid to the environment by providing legal services to conservation organizations, community groups, native american tribes, and individuals working to protect and sustain the pacific northwest's natural legacy.
Coquille watershed association (coqwa) works collaboratively with communities and landowners to develop and implement voluntary watershed restoration, enhancement, and community engagement activities that promote healthy and resilient…
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
Washington trails association is on a mission to connect everyone to the outdoors and build a community that gives back to trails and public lands.
Oregon recreation and park association (opra) mission is to support the recreation and park profession in oregon through leadership, education, advocacy and member services.
Over the next five years, portland trails will work to transform greater portland into a regional hub of connectivity and sustainability. by facilitating the expansion and enhancement of our trail network, we will foster inclusive…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wild Salmon Center and the most unlike its peers is Friends of the Historic Columbia River H. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
12 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. 12 of the 13 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 TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ↗
- Who funds Trustees of Tufts College ↗
- Who funds Friends of the Historic Columbia River H ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY TRANSITIONAL SCHOOL ↗
- Who funds OREGON FOOD BANK ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY CYCLING CENTER ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds WILD SALMON CENTER ↗
- Who funds PACIFIC CREST TRAIL ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds DESCHUTES RIVER ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds PROJECT HEALING WATERS FLY FISHING INC ↗
- Who funds OREGON HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
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: The Oregon Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Richard Robert Miselis 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.
- Wild Salmon Center — 49% of income from government
- Project Healing Waters Fly Fishing Inc — 46% of income from government
- Oregon Food Bank — 21% of income from government
- Trustees of Tufts College — 13% of income from government
- Community Transitional School — 7% of income from government
- Community Cycling Center — 2% 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.