· Private foundation
Wrg Foundation
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 $10k19 grants · $51k
- $10k–50k27 grants · $495k
- $50k–250k5 grants · $290k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| OREGON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $85,000 |
| ABBEY OF REGINA LAUDIS | $55,000 |
| GRYMES MEMORIAL SCHOOL | $50,000 |
| MESA FARMS - OJAI CA | $50,000 |
| GOOD COUNSEL | $50,000 |
| YOUTH VILLAGES | $47,500 |
| ST ANDREW NATIVITY SCHOOL | $45,000 |
| PATH HOME | $40,000 |
| FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN | $35,000 |
| MERCY CORPS | $25,000 |
| SAVING MOTHERS | $25,000 |
| REACH OUT AND READ OREGON | $25,000 |
| GLADSTONE SCHOOL DISTRICT FOUNDATION | $20,500 |
| PARTNERSHIP TO END HOMELESSNESS | $20,000 |
| PROVIDENCE ST VINCENT MEDICAL FOUNDATION | $20,000 |
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, $472k) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 63% 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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +49% since the first grant, against +10% for the ones you funded once.
83 repeat relationships — 40 still active in FY2024, 43 since wound down; 8 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, 93% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $49k 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
- MCMercy Corps8× · 2017–2024 · $330k · revenue +19%
PROVIDENCE ST VINCENT MEDICAL FOUNDATION6× · 2017–2024 · $188k · revenue +258%- GCGOOD COUNSEL INC6× · 2017–2024 · $185k · revenue +9%
Funded once
- NPNURSE-FAMILY PARTNERSHIPone grant, 2021 · $50k
Proud Groundone grant, 2023 · $25k · revenue +10%- PSPROVIDENCE ST VINCENT EATING DISORDER PROGRAMone grant, 2021 · $25k
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.
To eliminate disparities in health care access and outcomes by providing superior quality health and human services through an integrated world-class delivery system for latino, multi-ethnic underserved communities in southern california.
Oregon research institute is an independent behavioral sciences research center dedicated to understanding human behavior and improving the quality of human life through the prevention and treatment of health, educational, and social…
Support significant improvements in health care delivery and outcomes within the context of nonprofit, charitable ownership.
To provide exceptional healthcare services in a safe and trustful environment through the expertise, committment, and compassion of our family of caregivers.
Mission: together we advance the quality of life for people with disabilities. vision: people of all abilities thrive in the world. values: impact- generate solutions that make a difference. choice - create opportunities for people to lead…
Our mission: to improve the quality of health care.our vision: better health care. better choices. better health.
People inc. provides health and human services that enrich lives and communities through innovation and supportive services. with a goal to help people achieve greater independence and quality of life, people inc. provides day,…
To support salem health, salem health west valley and related organizations.
To preserve and enhance the quality of life at home, with dignity and care.
As expressions of god's healing love, witnessed through the ministry of jesus, we are steadfast in serving all, especially those who are poor and vulnerable.
The organization provides medical care to improve, maintain, and restore the health of the people in the communities we serve.
The organization provides primary medical, behavior health, and dental care to the population of san joaquin, and solano counties without regard to patients' ability to pay.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Center for the Study of Social Policy and the most unlike its peers is Gullah Museum of Hilton Head Inc Gullah Museum of Hilton Headinc. 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 39 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) — 2% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 1% 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.
88 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. 88 of the 145 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 OREGON COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds AMERICAN ENDOWMENT FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Mercy Corps ↗
- Who funds PROVIDENCE ST VINCENT MEDICAL FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds GOOD COUNSEL INC ↗
- Who funds GRYMES MEMORIAL SCHOOL INC ↗
- Who funds YOUTH VILLAGES INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF SOCIAL POLICY ↗
- Who funds FRIENDS OF THE CHILDREN ↗
- Who funds MUSTARD SEED COMMUNITIES INC ↗
- Who funds NURSE-FAMILY PARTNERSHIP ↗
- Who funds PATH HOME ↗
- Who funds VOLUNTEERS IN MEDICINE CLINIC ↗
- Who funds MEMORY MATTERS ↗
- Who funds SMART READING ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF THE LOWCOUNTRY INC ↗
- Who funds THE CAMPBELL INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds Community Foundation of the Lowcountry ↗
- Who funds Metropolitan Family Service ↗
- Who funds NAMI LOWCOUNTRY ↗
- Who funds NAMI OREGON ↗
- Who funds GO2 For Lung Cancer ↗
- Who funds THE CARVER INC ↗
- Who funds SAVING MOTHERS ↗
- Who funds MIRASOL HEALTH INC ↗
- Who funds CASA FOR CHILDREN INC ↗
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 · OCF Joseph E Weston Public Foundation · Marie Lamfrom Charitable Foundation Trust · Maybelle Clark Macdonald Fund · Meyer Memorial Trust · Juan Young Trust · Clark Foundation · The Jackson Foundation · The Collins Foundation · The Autzen Foundation · Hillman Family Foundations · M J Murdock Charitable Trust
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 Wrg 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.
- Morrison Child and Family Services — 91% of income from government
- Albertina Kerr Centers — 74% of income from government
- Mercy Corps — 47% of income from government
- Metropolitan Family Service — 29% of income from government
- Oregon Food Bank — 21% of income from government
- New Avenues for Youth Inc — 20% of income from government
- The Carver Inc — 16% of income from government
- Medical Teams International — 14% of income from government
- Proud Ground — 11% of income from government
- Nami Oregon — 10% of income from government
- Literary Arts Inc — 10% of income from government
- The Center for Independent Documentary Inc — 6% of income from government
- Smart Reading — 3% of income from government
- The Oregon Community Foundation — 2% of income from government
- Casa for Children Inc — 2% of income from government
- Parenting Now — 1% of income from government
- Volunteers in Medicine Clinic — 0% of income from government
- The Campbell Institute — 0% of income from government
- Bird Alliance of Oregon 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.