· Public charity
Rural Development Initiatives Inc
Rdi strengthens rural people, places, and economies in the pacific northwest.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 3 grants below total $41,800 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $167,500 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $125,700 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k1 grant · $9k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $33k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE LIGHTHOUSE COMMUNITY CENTER | $17,000 |
| ROTARY CLUB OF OTHELLO | $16,000 |
| OTHELLO SENIOR CENTER | $8,800 |
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, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 20%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 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.
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 +94% since the first grant, against +40% for the ones you funded once.
6 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 6 since wound down; 3 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, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $42k 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
- WSWARM SPRINGS COMMUNITY ACTION TEAM2× · 2020–2021 · $40k · revenue +165%
HIGH DESERT PARTNERSHIP2× · 2020–2021 · $40k · revenue +486%- NONORTHEAST OREGON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT2× · 2020–2021 · $28k · revenue +94%
Funded once
- COCYCLE OREGON INCgraduatedone grant, 2020 · $150k · revenue +212% · 31% of their budget
- BMBLUE MOUNTAIN ACTION COUNCILgraduatedone grant, 2021 · $8k · revenue +40%
- DCDBG CONSTRUCTION LLCone grant, 2023 · $6k
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 build and maintain strong, diverse business districts; to create and retain living wage jobs; and to promote Molalla as a rewarding place to work, live, invest, and shop.
Economic development for the west central mountain idaho region
To provide for the expansion of the employment base of Nez Perce County, by promoting the benefits of Nez Perce County to businesses and industries throughout the world that may have an interest in conducting operations in Nez Perce County.
WCDA's mission is to create opportunities for business formation, growth and job creation and preserve the economic and social integrity of the places in which it does business. The WCDA was formed to acquire strategically located…
To accelerate entrepreneurial activity and enhance economic revitalization throughout the state of oregon.
The primary purpose of Washington State Rural Development Council is to work with rural partners around Washington State to coordinate services to rural communities and promote initiatives that support rural community and economic…
To foster an innovative and resilient ecomomy for north cental washington's businesses, workers and families. as a regional organization, we create an arthurian-style partnership among regional communitites to identify and advance projects…
The mission of the Oregon Economic Development Districts is to provide a cohesive network for effective, efficient delivery of economic development services benefiting healthy and sustainable communities and businesses.
To encourage, stimulate and promote economic development, expansion and diversification in southeastern montana
We increase access to economic opportunities for business owners, entrepreneurs, and individuals in Central Washington by connecting and providing them with resources, representation, and opportunities to build community.
To accelerate inclusive economic prosperity in lane county, oregon
Baker City Downtown (BCD) is an organization that strives to preserve and enhance the vitality and character of our community through the beautification, promotion and development of downtown Baker City.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Warm Springs Community Action Team and the most unlike its peers is High Desert Partnership. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
10 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. 10 of the 15 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 CYCLE OREGON INC ↗
- Who funds WARM SPRINGS COMMUNITY ACTION TEAM ↗
- Who funds HIGH DESERT PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds EUVALCREE ↗
- Who funds NORTHEAST OREGON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT ↗
- Who funds Launch Pad Baker ↗
- Who funds LIGHTHOUSE COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
- Who funds BLUE MOUNTAIN ACTION COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds Building Beyond The Walls ↗
- Who funds SOUTHEAST WASHINGTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATION ↗
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 Ford Family Foundation · The Oregon Community Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · 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 Rural Development Initiatives 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- High Desert Partnership — 100% of income from government
- Northeast Oregon Economic Development District — 100% of income from government
- Warm Springs Community Action Team — 28% of income from government
- Euvalcree — 18% of income from government
- Cycle Oregon Inc — 14% of income from government
- Launch Pad Baker — 10% 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.