· Public charity
Capital Matrix Inc
To further economic development by promoting and assisting the growth and development of business in idaho, montana, washington, utah, and the eastern counties of oregon.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 7 grants below total $88,659 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $93,659 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $5,000 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.
By grant size · FY2025
- Under $10k1 grant · $7k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $82k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| COLLEGE OF WESTERN IDAHO | $21,659 |
| GIRAFFE LAUGH EARLY LEARNING CENTER | $15,000 |
| IDAHO MANUFACTURING ALLIANCE | $15,000 |
| JANNUS INC | $10,000 |
| REDI FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| LEARNING LAB | $10,000 |
| NEIGHBORWORKS | $7,000 |
Do your dollars go where the need is?
Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, then read against the area’s typical level.
Your human-services grants (FY19–25, $138k) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 11% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty linein the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP; grantee ZIP can differ from where services are delivered.
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are actually delivered. Need from public data — U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.
Who you back again
Which organizations you funded more than once, and which you funded a single time. Each grantee is matched to its own filings.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +12% since the first grant, against 0% for the ones you funded once.
5 repeat relationships — 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).
How the two cohorts compare
Organizations
Total granted
Median revenue growth · since first grant
Still filing today
New vs renewed · share of each year
In FY2025, 23% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $69k went to new ones.
Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant
First-time = a grantee’s first year in your filing window; renewed = funded in an earlier year too. As a portfolio matures the renewed share naturally climbs — once funded, an org stays “renewable” — so the signal is the years that buck it (a new-grantee intake wave). 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
- MCMONTANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP3× · 2017–2024 · $240k · revenue +334%
- IHIdaho Hispanic Foundation Inc4× · 2019–2023 · $75k · revenue +289%
- GDGALLATIN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION DBA PROSPERA2× · 2022–2024 · $20k · revenue +12%
Funded once
- IFIdaho Fund at MoFione grant, 2019 · $65k
- MFMontana Fund at MoFione grant, 2021 · $50k
- MCMERIDIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INCone grant, 2024 · $25k · revenue 0%
Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.
The map has a center of gravity: the average direction from the rest of the sector toward the organizations the foundation funds — the shape of its giving. Scoring every nonprofit along that direction surfaces the ones that look most like the portfolio. These are the closest matchesthat aren’t grantees — a resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.
To help technology companies in Idaho start, grow, and thrive.
Economic development for the west central mountain idaho region
Represent and promote the interests of its members businesses through our programs,sponsorships, initiatives,and educational luncheons.
To serve as a catalyst for quality job growth and increased capital investment in the state.
To encourage, stimulate and promote economic development, expansion and diversification in southeastern montana
To provide for the expansion of the employment base of Nez Perce County, by promoting the benefits of Nez Perce County to businesses and industries throughout the world that may have an interest in conducting operations in Nez Perce County.
The mblc exists to encourage and enact business-friendly policies that create good-paying jobs and make montana a better place to live. the primary purpose of the mblc is to educate the public on important business issues, enable citizens…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Jannus Inc and the most unlike its peers is Horse & Halo Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
13 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.
Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue from every source. Association, dated; never a causal claim.
Counted here: distinct organizations you funded across 2017–2025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 22 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile; the rest are funded organizations whose filings we could not track year by year.
Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee
Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing
Go grantee by grantee — a decade per org, and how each moved after you funded them
A decade per grantee — revenue shaded, your grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.
- Who funds MONTANA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORP ↗
- Who funds Idaho Hispanic Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds JANNUS INC ↗
- Who funds MERIDIAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE INC ↗
- Who funds LEARNING LAB INC ↗
- Who funds GALLATIN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION DBA PROSPERA ↗
- Who funds Idaho Manufacturing Alliance Inc ↗
- Who funds GIRAFFE LAUGH INC ↗
- Who funds The Momentum Group Create Common Good ↗
- Who funds Horse & Halo Inc ↗
- Who funds REDI FOUNDATION INC ↗
- Who funds Idaho Economic Development Assoc ↗
- Who funds NEIGHBORWORKS BOISE ↗
The grantmakers whose grantees overlap with yours far more than size alone predicts. Each orbits closer the stronger the alignment; the arcs between them show where they also fund each other. Here it reads as a tightly interlocked camp — most of these funders back each other's grantees too.
Open a dossier: St Luke's Health System Ltd · Idaho Community Foundation Inc · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · United Way of Treasure Valley Inc · El& Bg Lightfoot Foundation · Idaho Power Foundation Inc · Laura Moore Cunningham Foundation Inc · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. A research starting point: overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.
Government reliance of your grantees
Every dot is one organization Capital Matrix Inc funds. Left–right is the share of its income from government; up–down is the share from you. Bigger dots raise more. Filter to federal or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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 your grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first — a floor, not 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 12–24 months.