· Private foundation
Rogers 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 $10k24 grants · $105k
- $10k–50k17 grants · $291k
- $50k–250k15 grants · $1.0M
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| KINO BORDER INITIATIVE | $130,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $125,000 |
| CENTER FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE | $75,000 |
| ALIGHT | $75,000 |
| GLOBAL STRATEGIES | $75,000 |
| WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN | $70,000 |
| SISTERS OF THE BLESSED SACRAMENT | $55,000 |
| SPOON | $55,000 |
| EVERFREE | $55,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $50,000 |
| RAINFOREST ACTION NETWORK | $50,000 |
| ANERA (GAZA FUND) | $50,000 |
| UNICEF | $50,000 |
| CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE | $50,000 |
| PROJECT INNERSPACE | $50,000 |
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.
Your human-services grants (FY20–25, $512k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 97% 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 +10% since the first grant, against +7% for the ones you funded once.
47 repeat relationships — 27 still active in FY2025, 20 since wound down; 29 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, 74% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $371k 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
- KBKINO BORDER INITIATIVE INC6× · 2020–2025 · $525k · revenue +22%
- SFSPOON FOUNDATION6× · 2020–2025 · $330k · revenue +41%
- AALIGHT2× · 2024–2025 · $140k · revenue +25%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2024 · $75k
- SASYRIAN AMERICAN MEDICAL SOCIETYone grant, 2023 · $50k · revenue -19%
- WWHOIone grant, 2024 · $50k
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.
Actionaid is an international network building a just, equitable, and sustainable world in solidarity with communities on the frontlines of poverty and injustice. actionaid usa is the u.s. branch of actionaid international, which works in…
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
To strenghten people's ability to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment, via the development, implementation, and effective enforcement of national and international law.
Water.org's goal is to bring safe water and sanitation to the world through access to small, affordable loans.
Friends of the earth strives for a more healthy and just world by defendng the environment and human health while advancing social and economic justice by conducting research and education, transforming the economy so it protects the…
To engage and catalyze global seafood supply chains in rebuilding depleted fish stocks and reducing the environmental impacts of fishing and fish farming.
To nourish the world's hungry through uniting and advancing food banks.
Project drawdown's mission is to drive meaningful climate action by advancing science-based solutions and strategies. project drawdown's work is focused on three pillars: science - advancing science-based climate solutions and strategies;…
Wri is committed to creating change that improves people's lives and ensures the natural world can thrive. (see schedule o)wri's bold vision requires a formula for success we call "count it. change it. scale it.":- count it: our work is…
The union of concerned scientists puts rigorous, independent science into action, developing solutions and advocating for a healthy, safe, and just future.
Namati, inc. (namati) is dedicated to putting the law in people's hands. we strive to build a just world, in which every one of us can take part in the decisions and demand accountability from the institutions that affect our lives.…
Technoserve's mission is to fight poverty by helping people build regenerative farms, businesses, and markets that increase incomes.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is New Destiny Housing Corporation and the most unlike its peers is Change of Path. 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 27 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) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 4% 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.
113 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.
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 2017–2026, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 113 of the 182 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 KINO BORDER INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds Global Strategies ↗
- Who funds SPOON FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ALIGHT ↗
- Who funds CLEAN AIR TASK FORCE INC ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR VICTIMS OF TORTURE ↗
- Who funds UNITED STATES FUND FOR UNICEF ↗
- Who funds Rainforest Action Network ↗
- Who funds PROJECT INNERSPACE INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds CHANGE OF PATH ↗
- Who funds TERRAPRAXIS INC ↗
- Who funds Willow International Everfree ↗
- Who funds RANGELANDS REGENERATION ↗
- Who funds SYRIAN AMERICAN MEDICAL SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds SECOND HARVEST HEARTLAND ↗
- Who funds CASITA COPAN INC ↗
- Who funds MYRIAD USA INC ↗
- Who funds MIDDLE EAST CHILDREN'S ALLIANCE ↗
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: Meyer Memorial Trust · The Collins Foundation · The Oregon Community Foundation · The Robert D and Marcia H Randall Charitable Trust · Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation Trust · The Harold & Arlene Schnitzer Care Foundation · OCF Joseph E Weston Public Foundation · Impactassetsinc · The Jackson Foundation · Newalliance Foundation Inc · Careoregon Inc · Juan Young 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 Rogers 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.
- Oregon Worker Relief — 100% of income from government
- Youth Continuum Inc — 76% of income from government
- Dove Inc — 60% of income from government
- Reach Beyond Domestic Violence Inc — 53% of income from government
- The Diaper Bank of Connecticut Inc — 49% of income from government
- New Reach Inc — 49% of income from government
- United Way of Greater New Haven Inc — 42% of income from government
- Mental Health Association of Oregon — 41% of income from government
- Save the Sound — 37% of income from government
- Project Innerspace Inc — 34% of income from government
- Outside in — 33% of income from government
- Native American Youth and Family Center — 23% of income from government
- Oregon Food Bank — 21% of income from government
- Reach Community Development Inc — 18% of income from government
- The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc — 16% of income from government
- Project Lemonade Inc — 15% of income from government
- Connecticut Foodshare Inc — 5% of income from government
- Cascadia Health — 3% of income from government
- Friendly House Inc — 3% of income from government
- The Oregon Community Foundation — 2% of income from government
- The Dougy Center Inc — 1% of income from government
- Partners in Health a Nonprofit Corporation — 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 Rogers Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Rogers 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.