Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

VertueLab

To unleash innovation and entrepreneurship that will solve environmental challenges and catalyze shared economic prosperity.

$111k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$70k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Science & Tech$952kEnvironment$251kCommunity Improvement$223kSocial Science$11kFood & Nutrition$11kYouth Development$5k
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k2 grants · $41k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $70k
$21,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.8M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
U OF W CLEAN ENERGY TESTBEDS$69,732
U OF W COMOTION LABS$21,000
CLEAN TECH ALLIANCE$19,876
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 99% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%OPCONNECT INC: $9k → 8%FOOD4ALL: $11k → 10%FOCAL TECHNOLOGIES: $9k → 12%AMPERE SCIENTIFIC: $15k → 13%CITY OF SPRINGFIELD: $78k → 15%OREGON TECH FOUNDATION: $50k → 16%WARM SPRINGS COMMUNITY ACTION: $25k → 16%OREGON STATE UNIV FOUNDATION: $50k → 18%CLEAN TECH ALLIANCE: $98k → 9%WASHINGTON STATE UNIV FOUND: $50k → 20%ONBOARD DYNAMICS: $12k → 10%LATINO FOUNDERS: $180k → 12%GADUSOL LABORATORIES: $5k → 18%CLEAN TECH ALLIANCE: $20k → 9%ONBOARD DYNAMICS: $10k → 10%SKIP TECHNOLOGIES: $10k → 12%OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY: $232k → 18%U OF W COMOTION LABS: $21k → 9%ONBOARD DYNAMICS: $10k → 10%SKIP TECHNOLOGIES: $10k → 12%OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY: $110k → 18%BLUE DOT PHOTONICS: $5k → 9%BLADE RUNNER ENERGY: $6k → 10%PSU FOUNDATION: $50k → 12%OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY: $59k → 18%WASHINGTON CLEAN ENERGY TESTB: $114k → 9%LEAPFROG DESIGN: $6k → 10%PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY: $40k → 12%U OF W CLEAN ENERGY TESTBEDS: $70k → 9%PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY: $26k → 12%ENERGY RM: $5k → 12%WHEYWARD SPIRIT: $5k → 12%RUTE FOUNDATION SYSTEMS INC: $9k → 12%COMMUNITY ENERGY LABS: $8k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

43%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$624k · 5 repeat orgs$830k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships — 1 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
23

Total granted

$624k
$739k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

0%
0%

Still filing today

20%
30%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 18% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $91k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationCommunity ImprovementEnvironmentOther

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

  • OS
    OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2017–2020 · $401k
  • WC
    Washington Clean Technology Alliance
    2× · 2024–2025 · $117k · revenue 0%
  • PS
    PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2020–2021 · $66k

Funded once

  • LF
    LATINO FOUNDERS
    one grant, 2024 · $180k
  • WC
    WASHINGTON CLEAN ENERGY TESTB
    one grant, 2024 · $114k
  • CO
    CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
    one grant, 2017 · $78k

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Wsu Tech Foundation

To support, assist and promote the interest and welfare of wsu tech and its programs and activities.

Education
2
Oregon Innovation Foundation

To ignite and amplify a culture of creative problem solving and empower the next generation of innovators to meet some of the biggest challenges facing our state.

Science & Tech
3
Oregon Energy Systems Technology and Research
Environment
4
Eastern Oregon University Foundation

Established in 1964 for the philanthropic benefit of Eastern Oregon University, the Foundation raises funds to support the mission of Eastern Oregon University.

Education
5
University of Oregon Foundation

The purpose and mission of the foundation are, acting on its own or through affiliates, to support and assist the university of oregon in its activities by management and administration of foundation assets representing privately donated…

Education
6
Clean Energy Transition Institute

The Clean Energy Transition Institute (CETI) is an independent, nonpartisan research and analysis nonprofit whose mission is to accelerate an equitable clean energy transition in the Northwest.

Education
7
Pacific Northwest University of Health Sciences

Pacific Northwest University of Health Sciences educates and trains health care professionals emphasizing service among rural and medically under-served communities throughout the Northwest.

Education
8
U of O Foundation Supporting Organization

See schedule othe purpose and mission of the organization is to support and assist the university of oregon foundation in its activities by management and administration of organization assets representing privately donated funds, by…

Education
9
University of Western States

The mission of the University of Western States is to advance the science and art of integrated health care through excellence in education and patient care.

Health
10
Washington State Academy of Sciences

WSAS provides expert scientific and engineering assessments to inform public policy making and works to increase the impact of research in Washington State.

Science & Tech
11
Central Washington University Foundation

In partnership with cwu and our donors, our mission is to transform the lives of current and future generations of students by developing and stewarding resources that provide access, opportunity, and hope.

12
Achievement Rewards for College Scientists Foundation Inc Oregon Chapter

The foundation advances science and technology in the united states by providing financial awards to academically outstanding u.s. citizens studying to complete doctoral degrees in science, engineering and medical research.

Education

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Washington State University Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Washington Clean Technology Alliance. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

04the grantee network

8 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 8 of the 29 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
3/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY — $400,868 · OtherOREGON STATE UNIVERSITYWASHINGTON CLEAN ENERGY TESTB — $113,988 · OtherWASHINGTON CLEAN ENERGY TESTBUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON — $90,732 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTONCITY OF SPRINGFIELD — $77,500 · OtherCITY OF SPRINGFIELDPORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY — $66,139 · OtherPORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITYPORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION — $50,000 · Other+16 more — $157,409 · Other+16 moreLATINO FOUNDERS — $180,000 · Community ImprovementLATINO FOUNDERSWashington Clean Technology Alliance — $117,476 · Community ImprovementWashington Clean Technolo…WARM SPRINGS COMMUNITY ACTION TEAM — $25,000 · Community ImprovementWARM SPRINGS COMMUNITY AC…OREGON TECH FOUNDATION INC — $50,000 · EducationOREGON TECH…WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION — $50,000 · EducationWASHINGTON …Oregon State University Foundation — $50,000 · EducationOregon Stat…Beyond Toxics — $25,000 · Environment
Other$956,636Community Improvement$322,476Education$150,000Environment$25,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetWashington Clean Technology Alliance — $117,476 over 2y, 7.2% of budgetOregon State University Foundation — $50,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetPORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION — $50,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBeyond Toxics — $25,000 over 1y, 2.3% of budgetWARM SPRINGS COMMUNITY ACTION TEAM — $25,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budget
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 LATINO FOUNDERS
  • Who funds Washington Clean Technology Alliance
  • Who funds OREGON TECH FOUNDATION INC
  • Who funds WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
  • Who funds Oregon State University Foundation
  • Who funds PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION
  • Who funds Beyond Toxics
  • Who funds WARM SPRINGS COMMUNITY ACTION TEAM

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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

The Oregon Community FoundationOR12.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Oregon Community 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 VertueLab 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.

2023
202122232425
no gov · 20%1%3%6%10%your share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%share of the org’s income from governmentmedian 3%
  • Beyond Toxics15% of income from government
  • Warm Springs Community Action Team3% of income from government
  • Portland State University Foundation0% of income from government
  • Oregon State University Foundation0% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
2get no government money at all
0rely on government for over half their income
⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
typical government reliance, FY2025

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.

On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 29 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears. How we build these →

Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

More from the funding graph