· Private foundation
The Edwards 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 FY2018–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k47 grants · $132k
- $10k–50k2 grants · $35k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| LUTHERAN WORLD RELIEF | $25,000 |
| WORLD BICYCLE RELIEF | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $6,000 |
| GLOBAL REFUGE | $6,000 |
| THE LUKE COMMISSION | $5,500 |
| ROCK CREEK ALLIANCE | $5,000 |
| HIGH FIVE FOUNDATION | $5,000 |
| LUTEC HIGH SCHOOL | $5,000 |
| RISE UNIVERSITY PREP | $5,000 |
| REALOPTIONS | $4,000 |
| WE RAISE FOUNDATION | $4,000 |
| SECOND HARVEST | $4,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $4,000 |
| KANISKU LAND TRUST | $4,000 |
| PLI - PASTORAL LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE | $4,000 |
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 (FY18–25, $40k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, 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.
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.
53 repeat relationships — 39 still active in FY2025, 14 since wound down; 10 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $28k 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
- LWLUTHERAN WORLD RELIEF INC7× · 2019–2025 · $130k · revenue +48%
- PLPASTORAL LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE5× · 2021–2025 · $119k · revenue +42%
- LILUTHERAN IMMIGRATION & REFUGEE SERVICE INC DBA GLOBAL REFUGE8× · 2018–2025 · $41k · revenue +501%
Funded once
- RFRYAA FAMILY FOUNDATIONone grant, 2018 · $6k
- LBLITTLE BIG HORN COLLEGEone grant, 2023 · $5k
- PPPOW PROTECT OUS WINTERSone grant, 2021 · $1k
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.
The mission of the montana land reliance (mlr) is to partner with landowners to provide permanent protection for private lands that are significant for agricultural production, fish and wildlife habitat, and open space.
Public land solutions is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing comprehensive recreation planning and stakeholder coordination to support effective and sustainable public land solutions.
To create oppurtunites for conservation of natural, scenic, historic, recreational and agricultural values of southwestern idaho's open spaces through collabarative efforts for current and future generations. the land trust indentifies…
Oregon agricultural trust partners with farmers and ranchers to protect agricultural lands for the benefit of oregons economy, communities, and landscapes.
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…
Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.
Our mission is to work with landowners and communities to conserve the lands we love, now and forever, and to enrich connections to the natural world.
We partner with children and adults with disabilities and their families so they may live more meaningful, healthy, and independent lives in their homes and communities.
Our mission is to protect the rural nature of Wallowa County by working cooperatively with private landowners,indigenous people, local communities and governmental entities to conserve land.
The trust for public land creates parks and protects land for people, ensuring healthy, livable communities for generations to come. in the past year, we helped communities to plan for parks and conservation, fund parks and conservation,…
Conservation legacy engages future leaders who protect, restore, and enhance our nation's lands through community-based service.in 2024, conservation legacy engaged 2,524 participants who completed over 1.5 million service hours on public…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is We Raise Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Hands 4 Humanity Inc. 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 33 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) — 3% of your grantees by number, and just 0% 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.
35 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. 35 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 LUTHERAN WORLD RELIEF INC ↗
- Who funds PASTORAL LEADERSHIP INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds MT SCOTT PARK CENTER FOR LEARNING ↗
- Who funds LUTHERAN IMMIGRATION & REFUGEE SERVICE INC DBA GLOBAL REFUGE ↗
- Who funds HOPE HORIZON EAST PALO ALTO ↗
- Who funds HOLT INTERNATIONAL CHILDREN'S SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds ROCK CREEK ALLIANCE INC ↗
- Who funds WE RAISE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds EUREKA INSTITUTE INC (THE) ↗
- Who funds The Luke Commission ↗
- Who funds FIRST RESORT DBA SUPPORT CIRCLE PREGNANCY CLINICS ↗
- Who funds REALOPTIONS ↗
- Who funds Camp Rd Inc ↗
- Who funds MISSIO CHRISTI NETWORK ↗
- Who funds TODAYS YOUTH MATTER ↗
- Who funds HANDS 4 HUMANITY INC ↗
- Who funds DESCHUTES RIVER CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds JACKSON HOLE LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds SHEPHERD'S HOUSE MINISTRIES ↗
- Who funds YELLOWSTONE FOREVER ↗
- Who funds CONCORDIA EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds LAKE PEND OREILLE WATERKEEPER INC ↗
- Who funds URBAN ALCHEMY ↗
- Who funds KIDS INTERVENTION AND DIAGNOSTIC SERVICE CENTER ↗
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 · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · The Douglas and Gloria Rumberger Foundation · The Anjulicia Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · Thrivent Charitable Impact & Investing · Bright Funds Foundation · Innovia Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · The San Francisco Foundation · The Ayco Charitable Foundation · Thrivent Financial for Lutherans
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 Edwards 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.
- Lutheran Immigration & Refugee Service Inc Dba Global Refuge — 100% of income from government
- Deschutes River Conservancy — 100% of income from government
- Albertina Kerr Centers — 74% of income from government
- Central Oregon Veteran & Community Outreach Inc — 51% of income from government
- Lutheran World Relief Inc — 47% of income from government
- Bend-Redmond Habitat for Humanity — 17% of income from government
- Mt Scott Park Center for Learning — 2% of income from government
- Sandy Hook Promise Foundation — 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 Edwards Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to The Edwards 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.