Skip to content
Blue Mountain Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Blue Mountain Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$43k
Granted FY2025still arriving
3
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$20k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Health$165kHuman Services$67kArts & Culture$15kHousing & Shelter$10kPublic Benefit$5kYouth Development$2kOther$0
02FY2025 · 3 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k1 grant · $3k
  • $10k–50k2 grants · $40k
$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$233k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$20,000
STEP SEVEN INC$20,000
LYONS HISTORICAL SOCIETY$2,500
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY17–20, $10k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Share the Spirit: $4k → 11%SHARE THE SPIRIT: $4k → 11%SHARE THE SPIRIT FOUNDATION: $2k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

66%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$187k · 7 repeat orgs$97k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +95% since the first grant, against +6% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
7

Total granted

$187k
$77k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+95%
+6%

Still filing today

86%
71%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 53% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $20k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
HealthHuman ServicesArts & CultureReligionPublic BenefitOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • TC
    The Center For Medical Progress
    5× · 2017–2021 · $38k · revenue +95%
  • AP
    Alternatives Pregnancy Center
    3× · 2019–2021 · $30k · revenue +109%
  • LH
    LYONS HISTORICAL SOCIETY
    9× · 2017–2025 · $12k · revenue +18%

Funded once

  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $25k
  • VC
    VALOR CLINIC FOUNDATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $25k · revenue +181%
  • M
    MATTERSVILLEgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +85%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Alternatives

Alternatives provides medical and educational services that empower men and women to make life affirming choices concerning pregnancy and sexual health.

Religion
2
Choices Resource Center

Provide life-affirming care by sharing compassion, hope, and help to those facing pregnancy decisions.

Health
3
Pregnancy Choices of Skagit County

Pregnancy Choices is a Christian ministry caring for those touched by unplanned pregnancy by providing options and resources that promote life.

Health
4
Hope Medical

Hope Medical of Washington is a faith-based, non-profit community medical clinic providing compassionate, evidence-based health care services to empower people to make informed decisions. We offer free, confidential services including free…

Human Services
5
Blue Ridge Pregnancy Center Inc

Staff & volunteers serve those in pregnancy situations. All services are free: pregnancy testing/confirmation, limited obstetrical ultrasound, options counseling, community referrals, pregnancy, parenting & life skills classes, baby items,…

Health
6
Life Choice Pregnancy Center of Western North Carolina

Choosing Life over Abortion

Human Services
7
Desert Rose Womens Resource Center

Desert Rose Women's Resource Center is a Christian organization whose primary mission is to offer relevant, life affirming medical information to women and men considering abortion.

Human Services
8
Willow Womens Center

The organization offers medical services and resources to women who are or might be pregnant at no cost.

Human Services
9
Crisis Pregnancy Center of Montrose Inc dba Life Choices Family Resource Center

Crisis Pregnancy Center of Montrose, Inc. is a Christ-centered ministry which promotes life-affirming options by providing practical assistance, free education and material services to all those making decisions about their relationships,…

Health
10
A Caring Crisis Pregnancy Center of Northeast Colorado

The Organization was incorporated under the laws of the State of Colorado in 1999 for the purpose of providing support and alternative services for women and men who experience an unplanned pregnancy. As a faith based organization, the…

Health
11
Crisis Pregnancy Center

Develop and administer programs designed to assist women in confronting and dealing with the spiritual, physical, emotional, economic and social problems associated with pregnancy.

Health
12
Carolina Pregnancy Center Inc

The Carolina Pregnancy Center is a nonprofit ministry serving women, and their families, who are seeking help in making decisions about their pregnancy and well-being. Services include: Counseling, continuing emotional support, referrals…

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Valor Clinic Foundation; the most unlike its peers is Share the Spirit Foundation Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

11 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 11 of the 15 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
11/11
Grantees still filing
7/11
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Step Seven Inc: $40,000 · HealthStep Seven IncThe Center For Medical Progress: $38,000 · HealthThe Center For Medical ProgressVALOR CLINIC FOUNDATION: $25,000 · HealthVALOR CLINIC FOUNDATIONAlternatives Pregnancy Center Inc: $25,000 · HealthAlternatives Pregnancy Center IncMotorcycle Relief Project: $6,500 · HealthACT ON POVERTY CORP: $32,500 · OtherACT ON POVERTY CORPAlternatives Pregnancy Center: $30,000 · OtherAlternatives Pregnancy CenterIndividual grant recipient: $25,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $20,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientLYONS HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $12,000 · OtherLYONS HISTORICAL SOCIETYPARKER TASK FORCE: $5,000 · OtherMATTERSVILLE: $10,000 · Public BenefitSHARE THE SPIRIT FOUNDATION INC: $9,500 · Human ServicesLEAF GLOBAL ARTS: $3,000 · Arts & CultureTHE SHACK: $2,000 · Religion
Health$134,500Other$124,500Public Benefit$10,000Human Services$9,500Arts & Culture$3,000Religion$2,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetStep Seven Inc: $40,000 over 2y, 3.8% of budgetThe Center For Medical Progress: $38,000 over 5y, 1.1% of budgetAlternatives Pregnancy Center: $30,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetAlternatives Pregnancy Center Inc: $25,000 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetLYONS HISTORICAL SOCIETY: $12,000 over 9y, 5.8% of budgetMATTERSVILLE: $10,000 over 1y, 7.2% of budgetSHARE THE SPIRIT FOUNDATION INC: $9,500 over 3y, 8.5% of budgetLEAF GLOBAL ARTS: $3,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

American Endowment Fo…Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
American Endowment FoundationOH9.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: American Endowment Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Blue Mountain Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Blue Mountain Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%3%6%10%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    1report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Blue Mountain Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Blue Mountain Foundation 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 15 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Blue Mountain’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home