James F. and Marion L. Miller Foundation · Education · United States
The James F. and Marion L. Miller Foundation is a private foundation dedicated to supporting arts and education initiatives in Oregon. Their website clearly communicates their mission, funding areas, and grant programs targeting individual artists, arts organizations, and educational institutions. The foundation maintains an active presence with news updates, grantee spotlights, and social media engagement, positioning itself as a trusted regional grantmaker in the education and arts sectors. Technically, the website is built on the Webflow CMS platform, leveraging modern web technologies including Google Fonts, jQuery, and Google Tag Manager for analytics. The site is well-designed, mobile-optimized, and provides a good user experience with clear navigation and professional branding. However, there is room for improvement in accessibility and SEO best practices. From a security perspective, the site uses HTTPS with a strong SSL configuration and does not expose sensitive data. However, it lacks explicit security headers such as Content Security Policy and HSTS, and does not provide visible privacy or cookie policies, which are important for compliance and user trust. No vulnerability disclosure or incident response information is present, which could be enhanced to improve security posture. Overall, the website is professional, trustworthy, and serves its audience well, but should address privacy compliance and security best practices to reduce risk and enhance user confidence.
Scanned
Both readouts depend on the site's pages, which could not be loaded in this scan.
1 finding rated critical or high. Fix these first.
TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.
Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1
What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions
Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com
This scan found 15 issues across 4 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.
€25per month
Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.
Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.
€39.90one-time
Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.
Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.
The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.
Counted in this score
Not counted
Findings that cap the score at 49
Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.
Partial scans
When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.
Risk levels
Leaked credentials and lookalike domains from OffSeq Breach. The counts are free; the detailed lists are paid add-ons.
Leaked records that mention millerfound.org, from OffSeq Breach.
No leaked records found
Breach holds no records for millerfound.org right now. New leaks arrive continuously, so monitoring on Breach alerts you if that changes.
Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.
Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.
Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.
Retrieved 2026-10-25
Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.
Reviews of this site
Share your experience with millerfound.org. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.
Community rating
No published reviews yet. Be the first to review millerfound.org.