· Private foundation
The Buchanan Family Foundation Inc
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 $10k14 grants · $62k
- $10k–50k8 grants · $115k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $124k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| THE CONTINGENT | $73,500 |
| NATURE CONSERVANCY | $50,000 |
| LIFEWISE ACADEMY - E&D | $20,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $18,000 |
| SIGSC GREEN SPACE CONSERVANCY | $15,000 |
| LEXINGTON DREAM FACTORY | $15,000 |
| NATIONAL CENTER FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES | $15,000 |
| WOODHILL COMMUNITY CENTER | $12,000 |
| LEXINGTON REFUGE FOR WOMEN | $10,000 |
| SAFE PLACE FOR WOMEN | $10,000 |
| FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN | $8,000 |
| SEA ISLAND HUNGER AWARENESS FOUNDATION | $7,500 |
| CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION | $7,500 |
| SURGERY ON SUNDAYS | $7,500 |
| LEXINGTON HOPE CENTER | $6,000 |
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 (FY17–24, $53k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 4% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +25% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
44 repeat relationships — 20 still active in FY2024, 24 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, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $24k 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
- TCTHE CONTINGENT6× · 2017–2024 · $240k · revenue +182%
- 1B100 BLACK MEN OF GREATER WASHINGTON DC5× · 2020–2024 · $85k · revenue +67%
- RFREFUGE FOR WOMEN INC5× · 2017–2021 · $68k · revenue +25%
Funded once
- ESELI SINE -THE CONTINGENTone grant, 2022 · $47k
- WCWOODHILL COMMUNITY CENTER - THE MAP FOUNDATIONone grant, 2020 · $18k
- MFMAP FOUNDATION INCgraduatedone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +44%
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.
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…
Ci works to spotlight and secure the critical benefits that nature provides to humanity.
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.
Nacwa is the national voice of public clean water utilities, shaping water policy, convening a vibrant peer network, and empowering water leaders.
Rainforest trust saves endangered wildlife and protects our planet by creating rainforest reserves through partnerships, community engagement, and donor support.
To offer the dignity of fair employment to people living in impoverished communities, who become transformational agents of global forest restoration.
Climate catalyst sparks collective action to tackle the biggest climate challenges we face today: cutting emissions in heavy industries.
Ocean conservancy unites science, people, and policy to protect our ocean, today and for generations to come.
To drive transformational adaptation to protect communities across the country from higher seas, stronger storms, and more frequent flooding.
The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…
Nedc's mission is to work toward a future in which the pacific northwest leads the nation in developing, implementing & enforcing strong laws and regulations that protect the environment & human health, and where our governments &…
Environment next supports individuals, nonprofits and businesses around the world on solutions to complex climate issues. we provide leadership, outreach and communication support, grants, and investments to empower leaders and their ideas…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is National Center for Children and Families and the most unlike its peers is Veterans Park Elementary Pta. 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 29 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) — 9% of your grantees by number, and just 1% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 3% 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.
38 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. 38 of the 70 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 THE CONTINGENT ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds 100 BLACK MEN OF GREATER WASHINGTON DC ↗
- Who funds REFUGE FOR WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN-PORTLAND ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL CENTER FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ↗
- Who funds THE CORAL RESTORATION FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds Oregon Environmental Council ↗
- Who funds Sea Island Hunger Awareness Foundation ↗
- Who funds SURGERY ON SUNDAY INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds FOOD RECOVERY NETWORK INC ↗
- Who funds Rocky Mountain Institute ↗
- Who funds MAP FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds KEEN GREATER DC LLC ↗
- Who funds THE DC CENTRAL KITCHEN INC ↗
- Who funds WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR WOMEN CHILDREN AND FAMILIES INC ↗
- Who funds HABITAT FOR HUMANITY INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL COALITION OF 100 BLACK WOMEN INC ↗
- Who funds VETERANS PARK ELEMENTARY PTA ↗
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 Oregon Community Foundation · Keeneland Foundation Inc · Gray Family Foundation · Baird Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · National Philanthropic Trust · Jpmorgan Chase Foundation · Network for Good · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · The Blackbaud Giving Fund
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 The Buchanan Family Foundation 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.
- Oregon Food Bank — 21% of income from government
- The Coral Restoration Foundation Inc — 16% of income from government
- The Blueprint Foundation — 10% of income from government
- The Contingent — 5% of income from government
- Friends of the Children-Portland — 5% of income from government
- National Center for Children and Families — 2% of income from government
- The Oregon Community Foundation — 2% of income from government
- Columbia Riverkeeper — 1% of income from government
- Love Is King 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 The Buchanan Family Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to The Buchanan Family Foundation Inc 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.