· Private foundation
Tess Evans Charitable Foundation
Its FY2019 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2019.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WORLD WILDLIFE FUND | $8,300 |
| NATIONAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL | $5,900 |
| ORPHAN GRAIN TRAIN | $5,000 |
| DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS | $5,000 |
| THE NATURE CONSERVANCY OREGON | $3,000 |
| HEIFER INTERNATIONAL | $2,760 |
| LEADERSHIP ENTERPRISE FOR A DIVERSE | $1,800 |
| SURMANG FOUNDATION | $1,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,500 |
| PRISON MINDFULNESS INSTITUTE | $1,500 |
| Individual grant recipient | $1,500 |
| KONCHOK FOUNDATION | $1,000 |
| INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE | $1,000 |
| SAMARITAN'S PURSE | $1,000 |
| RAINFOREST TRUST | $1,000 |
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 (FY17–17, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 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.
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.
Where the work is directed
The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.
About 8% of Tess Evans Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another.
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.
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 +96% since the first grant, against +81% for the ones you funded once.
29 repeat relationships — 26 still active in FY2019, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (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 FY2019, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC3× · 2017–2019 · $18k · revenue +41%- OGORPHAN GRAIN TRAIN INC3× · 2017–2019 · $17k · revenue +25%
WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC2× · 2018–2019 · $17k · revenue +43%
Funded once
- ANAmerican National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branchesgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $10k · revenue +46%
- WLWORLD LAND TRUSTone grant, 2017 · $920
- AACCESSgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $500 · revenue +232%
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.
RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.
Wildlife alliance is the leader in direct protection of forests and wildlife in tropical asia. our mission is to combat deforestation, biodiversity loss, climate change, and poverty by partnering with local communities and governments.…
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
RA works at the intersection of business, agriculture & forests to improve lives & protect nature by transforming how land is used, production of goods & consumer choices.
Plant with purpose, a christian nonprofit organization, reverses deforestation and poverty around the world by transforming the lives of the rural poor. we do this through: - watershed restoration & regenerative agriculture - savings…
Rainforest Action Network (RAN) works toward a world where the rights and dignity of all communities are respected and where healthy forests, a stable climate and wild biodiversity are protected and celebrated.
The purpose of rainforest foundation us is to support indigenous peoples and forest communities in their efforts to secure their lands, protect their environment, and uphold their rights.
The mission of the nature conservancy is to conserve the lands and waters on which all life depends.
The international snow leopard trust aims to ethically conserve snow leopards and their high mountain ecosystems through partnerships with indigenous peoples and local communities, and through research to improve the understanding of snow…
Awf's mission is to ensure wildlife and wild lands thrive in modern africa. we work to equip african governments, institutions, business, and communities with the tools, insights, and support they need to define, own, and realize a…
To boldly engage the world's greatest crises in partnership with the church.
The international rhino foundation (irf) ensures the survival of rhinos through strategic partnerships, targeted protection, and scientifically sound interventions.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Park Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Konchok Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 37 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) — 5% of your grantees by number, and just 1% 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.
19 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. 19 of the 37 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 NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds ORPHAN GRAIN TRAIN INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD WILDLIFE FUND INC ↗
- Who funds MEDECINS SANS FRONTIERES USA INC ↗
- Who funds THE OREGON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds American National Red Cross & Its Constituent Chapters and Branches ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds SAMARITAN'S PURSE ↗
- Who funds Konchok Foundation ↗
- Who funds RAINFOREST TRUST ↗
- Who funds DRALA MOUNTAIN CENTER Formerly Shambhala Mountain Center ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY WORKS INC ↗
- Who funds ASHLAND SCHOOLS FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Prison Dharma Network Inc ↗
- Who funds TERGAR INTERNATIONAL ↗
- Who funds ACCESS ↗
- Who funds LOTUS OUTREACH ↗
- Who funds HOUSTON 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: Pema Chodron Foundation · Chintamani Foundation · Carrico Family Foundation · The Oregon Community Foundation · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Morgan Stanley Global Impact Funding Trust Inc · Network for Good · 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 Tess Evans Charitable 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.
- Access — 65% of income from government
- Community Works Inc — 59% of income from government
- The Oregon Community Foundation — 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.