CENTER FOR INTERCULTURAL ORGANIZING

The organization over time

Each line starts at 100 in 2017, so what you read is the shape rather than the size: 150 means half as much again as 2017, 50 means half. The number beside each label in the key is where it ended. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.

How it's funded, over time

Each bar is one year's revenue split into where it came from, and every bar is the same height — these are shares, not amounts, so a year that raised twice as much looks the same size. Hover a bar for the split.

Government-grant reliance: 2017 45% · 2018 53% · 2019 36% · 2020 50% · 2021 44% · 2022 45% · 2023 47% · 2024 35%. Grants only. Government contracts and fees sit inside program revenue.

Surplus & reserves

Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 2 of the last 8 reported years ran a deficit.

Who funds it, year by year

2017 → 2023: the base broadened from 5 funders to 22 funders, grant income rose $365k → $2.3M.

9 of 52 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 39% of grant dollars received. That money is really individual donors directing a sponsor; the institutions to cultivate are the non-DAF funders.

From the IRS filings of CENTER FOR INTERCULTURAL ORGANIZING’s funders (the co-funder graph). Top 30 of 52 funders by total. Association, not causation. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.

How concentrated its funding is

CENTER FOR INTERCULTURAL ORGANIZING has a broad base — no single funder exceeds 27% of grant income, and it takes 3 funders to reach half.

71% of the income these shares are computed over arrives through pass-through sponsors or from payers whose filings do not say what kind of payment it is. Concentration is still measured over all of it, because the money is real; what it does not support is a claim about how many institutions have chosen to fund CENTER FOR INTERCULTURAL ORGANIZING.

Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 40% · 2018 48% · 2019 20% · 2020 40% · 2021 29% · 2022 27% · 2023 54% — growing more concentrated.

“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.

How long its funders stay

36% of CENTER FOR INTERCULTURAL ORGANIZING's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 52% give in more than one year at all.

Share of funders still giving k years after their first recorded grant, pooled across every acquisition cohort. A funder counts as retained in a year only if it made a grant that year. Measured to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving — a funder cannot be counted as lapsed in a year most filers have not reached.

Where its funders are

68% of CENTER FOR INTERCULTURAL ORGANIZING's grant income comes from Oregon funders.

Funder states come from each funder’s own filing. $4.1M arriving through sponsors registered in 7 states is excluded from the map and the split above: a sponsor holds money on a donor’s behalf, so its registered address would place those dollars somewhere no donor need ever have been. Trends are read to FY2023, the last fiscal year that has finished arriving. FY2024–FY2026 are still being filed and are shown unshaded; they do not move any figure on this page.