· Public charity
Womens Foundation of Oregon
Women's foundation of oregon supports communities, programs, and individuals that improve the lives and opportunities of women and girls.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2020–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 9 grants below total $175,875 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $239,702 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $63,827 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 · FY2025
- $10k–50k8 grants · $101k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $75k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WOMEN FIRST REFERRAL CENTER | $75,000 |
| OUR MOSAIC VILLAGE | $28,500 |
| HARMONY TOURS | $11,375 |
| AMERICAN LEADERSHIP FORUM | $11,000 |
| DAISY CHAIN | $10,000 |
| RAHABS SISTERES | $10,000 |
| CALDRA ARTS | $10,000 |
| WOMENS CRISIS SUPPORT | $10,000 |
| GIRLS BUILD | $10,000 |
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 (FY20–25, $320k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 96% 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 +73% since the first grant, against +34% for the ones you funded once.
12 repeat relationships — 3 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 6 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 54% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $81k 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
WOMENFIRST TRANSITION REFERRAL CENTER3× · 2021–2025 · $185k · revenue +180%
CALL TO SAFETY2× · 2020–2024 · $33k · revenue +58%- IBIMAGINE BLACK FUTURES2× · 2021–2024 · $33k · revenue +28%
Funded once
- TTTriple Threat Mentoringgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue +55%
FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN-PORTLANDone grant, 2024 · $20k · revenue 0%- FPFAITHBRIDGE PORTLANDone grant, 2023 · $20k · revenue -28%
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.
Providing support and advocacy for abuse survivors.
Our mission is to protect, shelter, and empower survivors of domestic violence - offering safety, support, and resources with compassion and trauma-informed care.
Provide crisis intervention and trauma healing and recovery services for victims and survivors of violent crime in the portland area
Oregon Justice Network is an alliance built and staffed by criminal legal system impacted people advocating for the well-being of people affected or at-risk of being affected by carceral systems. Our work centers around restorative…
Domestic and sexual violence intervention, support, and education.
To ensure children and youth in oregon have access to high quality, comprehensive services and resources to address child abuse.
CBV heals the trauma of sexual assault and domestic violence by providing crisis intervention, safety, advocacy, and education to survivors and our community.
The mission of Safe Voices is to provide person-to-person, individualized advocacy for all survivors of domestic abuse and violence, sex trafficking, and sexual exploitation in Androscoggin, Franklin, and Oxford Counties and engage our…
Advocate for victims of crime within the criminal justice system and protective order cases; provide referrals to social-service agencies that can help crime victims recover. the center's services are available statewide at no cost to…
Sexual Violence Law Center (SVLC) is a nonprofit law firm that protects the safety, privacy, and civil rights of survivors of sexual and gender-based violence in Washington through holistic and trauma-informed practices rooted in race and…
The dove project is a domestic violence and sexual assault agency that provides survivor services, prevention education and community programming in an effort to reduce interpersonal harm.
Qualified for voca grant to fund program for shelter and services for victims of domestic and sexual violence
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Raphael House of Portland and the most unlike its peers is The Waterstrong Initiative. 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 27 years old; the field is 17. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 6% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 12% 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.
73 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. 73 of the 81 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 WOMENFIRST TRANSITION REFERRAL CENTER ↗
- Who funds CALL TO SAFETY ↗
- Who funds IMAGINE BLACK FUTURES ↗
- Who funds Oregon Tradeswomen Inc ↗
- Who funds RAHAB'S SISTERS ↗
- Who funds Bradley Angle ↗
- Who funds Center Against Rape and Domestic Violence ↗
- Who funds Girls Inc of the Pacific Northwest ↗
- Who funds DAISY C H A I N ↗
- Who funds Triple Threat Mentoring ↗
- Who funds FAMILY CRISIS SHELTER AND SERVICES FOR YAMHILL COUNTY INC ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN-PORTLAND ↗
- Who funds FAITHBRIDGE PORTLAND ↗
- Who funds WILD DIVERSITY ↗
- Who funds NE STEAM COALITION ↗
- Who funds OK YOU INC ↗
- Who funds FAMILY FORWARD OREGON ↗
- Who funds The Waterstrong Initiative ↗
- Who funds HAVEN FROM DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ↗
- Who funds Portland Collective Housing ↗
- Who funds Red Lodge Transition Services ↗
- Who funds Forward Together ↗
- Who funds RURAL ORGANIZING PROJECT ↗
- Who funds Shelter from the Storm ↗
- Who funds YWCA OF GREATER PORTLAND ↗
- Who funds WILLAMETTE VALLEY LAW PROJECT DBA PCUN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MY SISTERS' PLACE ↗
- Who funds Project DOVE ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST FAMILY SERVICES ↗
- Who funds Mano A Mano ↗
- Who funds DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SERVICES INC ↗
- Who funds SABLE HOUSE ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN LEADERSHIP FORUM OF OREGON ↗
- Who funds RAPHAEL HOUSE OF PORTLAND ↗
- Who funds THE CUPCAKE GIRLS ↗
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 Collins Foundation · The Oregon Community Foundation · Meyer Memorial Trust · The Autzen Foundation · OCF Joseph E Weston Public Foundation · The Ford Family Foundation · Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation Trust · Ronald W Naito Md Foundation · Seeding Justice · Braemar Charitable Trust · Oregon Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence · Northwest Health Foundation Fund II
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 Womens Foundation of Oregon 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 Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence — 100% of income from government
- Shelter from the Storm — 100% of income from government
- Mayday Inc — 88% of income from government
- Pioneer Relief Nursery Pioneer Relief Nursery — 87% of income from government
- Project Dove — 85% of income from government
- Triple Threat Mentoring — 81% of income from government
- Sexual Assault Resource Center — 81% of income from government
- Haven From Domestic Violence — 77% of income from government
- Treasure Valley Children's Relief Nurser — 70% of income from government
- Center for Hope and Safety — 68% of income from government
- The Harbor Inc — 66% of income from government
- Call to Safety — 61% of income from government
- Domestic Violence Services Inc — 57% of income from government
- The Safe Project — 54% of income from government
- Sable House — 50% of income from government
- Family Peace Center of Washington County — 49% of income from government
- Saving Grace — 48% of income from government
- Helping Hands Against Violence Inc — 48% of income from government
- Oregon Tradeswomen Inc — 46% of income from government
- Black Parent Initiative — 45% of income from government
- Building Healthy Families — 41% of income from government
- Northwest Family Services — 35% of income from government
- Clackamas Women's Services — 33% of income from government
- Tides of Change Fka Tillamook Co Women's Resource C — 31% of income from government
- Adelante Mujeres — 31% of income from government
- Micronesian Islander Community — 25% of income from government
- My Sisters' Place — 25% of income from government
- Ophelia's Place — 22% of income from government
- Willamette Valley Law Project Dba Pcun Foundation — 18% of income from government
- Ne Steam Coalition — 17% of income from government
- Ywca of Greater Portland — 15% of income from government
- Jackson County Sart — 14% of income from government
- El Programa Hispano Catolico — 13% of income from government
- Red Lodge Transition Services — 12% of income from government
- United Way of Jackson County Inc — 11% of income from government
- Raphael House of Portland — 10% of income from government
- Bradley Angle — 10% of income from government
- The Street Trust Community Fund — 6% of income from government
- Friends of the Children-Portland — 5% of income from government
- Girls Inc of the Pacific Northwest — 4% of income from government
- The Rosewood Initiative — 3% of income from government
- The Waterstrong Initiative — 3% of income from government
- Caldera — 1% of income from government
- Basic Rights Education Fund — 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 Womens Foundation of Oregon?
Find your warmest path to Womens Foundation of Oregon 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.