Skip to content
Brad S & Katherine L Mead Charitable Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Brad S & Katherine L Mead Charitable Foundation

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$35k
Granted FY2025still arriving
10
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$13k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2024.

Philanthropy$257kEducation$155kEnvironment$22kRecreation & Sports$10kEmployment$8kHealth$5kScience & Tech$5k
02FY2025 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k9 grants · $22k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $13k
$2,500
Median grant
2
States reached
$522k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA$13,446
GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION$5,000
FUND FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION$5,000
CLIMB WYOMING$2,500
COMMUNITY ENTRY SERVICES$2,500
WYO FILE$2,000
TETON LITERACY CENTER$1,500
HORSE WARRIORS$1,000
BECOMING JACKSON WHOLE$1,000
GIRLS ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING$1,000
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 (FY17–17, $3k) land where the poverty rate runs at 5%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%CLIMB WYOMING: $3k → 5%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.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 21% of Brad S & Katherine L Mead Charitable Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 79% of the giving stays in WY; by stated purpose, 69%.

Brad S & Katherine L Mead Charitable Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 8.7% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

78%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$201k · 10 repeat orgs$55k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +98% since the first grant, against +52% for those funded once.

10 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

10
11

Total granted

$201k
$50k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+98%
+52%

Still filing today

70%
36%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 86% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
EducationPhilanthropyYouth DevelopmentEmploymentHuman ServicesScience & TechOther
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

  • EF
    EDUCATION FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE
    5× · 2017–2025 · $41k · revenue +521%
  • GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION
    3× · 2022–2025 · $23k · revenue +98%
  • MM
    MOUNT MARTY UNIVERSITY
    2× · 2018–2019 · $12k · revenue +86%

Funded once

  • NL
    NORTHWEST LINEMAN COLLEGE
    one grant, 2024 · $11k
  • IG
    Individual grant recipient
    one grant, 2017 · $6k
  • GT
    GRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK
    one grant, 2017 · $5k
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
The Jackson Hole Technology Partnership

To fuel local, regional and global tech ecosystems to shape a better future.

Science & Tech
2
Jackson Hole Wildlife Foundation

Jackson hole wildlife foundation advances wildlife conservation driven by science, collaboration, and a community of volunteers.

Animals
3
Cowboy State Daily

Cowboy state daily's mission is to provide high-quality local and statewide reporting on the issues that impact wyoming, featuring stories that capture wyoming's wonderful "small town with long streets" vibe.

Arts & Culture
4
Jackson Hole Chamber of Commerce

The mission of the Jackson hole chamber of commerce is to champion the interest of local businesses, enhance their prosperity and strengthen the economic climate of teton county

—
5
Teewinot Institute

Research, education, and action that enhance the sustainability, resilience, and transformation of human relationships with the environment.

International
6
Womentum Inc

Womentum inspires and connects women to thrive as leaders.

Philanthropy
7
Jackson Hole Community School

JHCS prepares students to succeed in college and life through challenging academics and excellence in teaching, in a community founded on personal relationships, student initiative, and integrity.

Education
8
Jackson Hole Nordic Alliance

Jackson hole nordic alliance connects people & winter trails. we are the resource hub for local nordic, fat bike, snowshoe & trail information. we help build the winter trails community & promote responsible recreation.

Recreation & Sports
9
Scenic Montana Trails
—
10
Jackson Hole Ski & Snowboard Club

To inspire and develop student-athletes through innovative and accessible ski and snowboard programs that provide opportunities to pursue personal excellence in snowsports and life.

Recreation & Sports
11
Trout Unlimited Jackson Hole 051

Jhtu was formed in 1983 in jackson, wyoming, to conserve, protect, and restore jackson hole's coldwater fisheries and their watersheds. currently jhtu has a membershp of 410 jackson hole residents and others concerned about the precious…

Animals
12
Leadership Wyoming

Inspiring wyoming's leaders through exploration and connection.

Public Benefit
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jackson Hole Land Trust; the most unlike its peers is Grand Teton National Park Foundation. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
05the grantee network

17 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. 17 of the 27 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)
17/17
Grantees still filing
13/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

COMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE: $199,000 · PhilanthropyCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLEEDUCATION FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE: $41,000 · PhilanthropyEDUCATION FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLEWYOMING COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $40,000 · PhilanthropyWYOMING COMMUNITY FOUNDATIONGRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $22,500 · PhilanthropyGRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATIONUNIVERSITY OF MONTANA: $75,580 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF MONTANATRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND: $16,500 · OtherTRUST FOR PUBLIC LANDNORTHWEST LINEMAN COLLEGE: $11,000 · OtherNORTHWEST LINEMAN COLLEGEIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientIndividual grant recipient: $6,000 · Other+11 more: $31,385 · Other+11 moreMOUNT MARTY UNIVERSITY: $12,000 · EducationTETON LITERACY CENTER: $5,500 · EducationDavidson College: $2,000 · EducationCOMMUNITY ENTRY SERVICES INC: $7,500 · EmploymentCLIMB DBA CLIMB WYOMING: $5,500 · Human ServicesWyoming Star Gazing: $5,000 · Science & TechTETON VALLEY SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 · Recreation & Sports
Philanthropy$302,500Other$150,465Education$19,500Employment$7,500Human Services$5,500Science & Tech$5,000Recreation & Sports$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetCOMMUNITY FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE: $199,000 over 7y, 0.1% of budgetEDUCATION FOUNDATION OF JACKSON HOLE: $41,000 over 5y, 3.7% of budgetWYOMING COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $40,000 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetGRAND TETON NATIONAL PARK FOUNDATION: $22,500 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetMOUNT MARTY UNIVERSITY: $12,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCOMMUNITY ENTRY SERVICES INC: $7,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetCLIMB DBA CLIMB WYOMING: $5,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTETON LITERACY CENTER: $5,500 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetWyoming Star Gazing: $5,000 over 2y, 1.0% of budgetMENTAL HEALTH & RECOVERY SERVICES OF JACKSON HOLE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetTETON VALLEY SKI EDUCATION FOUNDATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.0% of budgetJACKSON HOLE LAND TRUST: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDavidson College: $2,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetHORSE WARRIORS: $1,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetBecoming Jackson Whole: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetGIRLS ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING: $1,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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.

Community Foundation …Karl M Johnson Founda…Hughes Charitable Fou…Natl Christian Charit…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Community Foundation of Jackson HoleWY17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 5 of 5Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Community Foundation of Jackson Hole · Karl M Johnson Foundation · Hughes Charitable Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn 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 Brad S & Katherine L Mead Charitable Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Brad S & Katherine L Mead Charitable Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–15%
    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 Brad S & Katherine L Mead Charitable Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Brad S & Katherine L Mead Charitable 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 27 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 Brad S & Katherine L Mead’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