Loading…
Loading…
Oregon · Nonprofit
ChickTech (Oregon) is funded by 32 grantmakers whose IRS filings report $861,788 in grants to it, the largest being INTEL FOUNDATION ($150,000). 12 of them have funded it in more than one year.
Against its field
ChickTech's funding base is broadening — from 2 funders to 3 as grant income climbed.
this organization peer median middle 50% of peers· 20,275 human services nonprofits $100k–$1M, FY2024
Revenue, expenses and net assets — each indexed to 100 at its first filing year, so you read the trajectory, not the magnitude. The shaded band is where the middle 50% of its peers' revenue would sit, given their growth.
The funding model — what share of revenue comes from contributions, programs, investments and other sources — and whether it's shifting.
99% of ChickTech’s revenue is contributions — more donation-reliant than the typical peer (87% for the typical peer).
Operating surplus or deficit each year, and months of liquidity in hand. 7 of the last 7 reported years ran a deficit.
The base broadened — 2 funders to 3 as grant income moved $16k → $58k.
9 of 32 of your funders are donor-advised or pass-through sponsors (tagged DAF) — 31% 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 ChickTech’s funders (the co-funder graph). Top 30 of 32 funders by total. Association, not causation.
ChickTech has a broad base — no single funder exceeds 17% of grant income, and it takes 4 funders to reach half.
the vertical line marks half of all grant income — 4 funders to its left
Largest funder’s share by year: 2017 97% · 2018 58% · 2019 62% · 2020 28% · 2021 39% · 2022 43% · 2023 51% · 2024 68% — diversifying over time.
“Effective funders” = inverse Herfindahl index (1 / Σ shareᵢ²) — the number of equal-sized funders that would give the same concentration.
19% of ChickTech's funders are still giving 3 years after their first grant; 38% 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.
ChickTech draws 61% of its grant income from funders outside Oregon — its reputation reaches beyond the state, across 16 states in all.
In-state vs out-of-state, by year
Grantmakers that don’t fund you yet, surfaced two ways: they back organizations that share your funders, or their grantees resemble your mission. The ones both signals agree on come first. Your 32 funders put you under-funded among the 400 organizations that share them.
From the co-funder graph (funders backing at least two comparable organizations, shrunk for grantee count, donor-advised and mega-funds excluded) and the universe embeddings. A research starting point; overlap is association, not a guarantee of fit.
Nonprofits whose mission and program text most resemble this one, by semantic similarity over the universe of US filings — the closest peers, and often the clearest route to shared or prospective funders.
Read directly from this organization’s own Form 990, as neutral context.
80% of spending goes to programs.
96%
Share of support from the public (Schedule A) — the basis for its public-charity status.
Operates in 1 state
Every figure is read directly from IRS Form 990 / 990-PF e-file XML — this organization’s own return for FY2024 (financials across 2018–2024), and the filings of 32funders that report grants to it. “On record” means captured in the filings we have parsed — a funder that does not e-file, or whose grant detail is not itemized, will not appear. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind. view filing