Skip to content
Davis Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Davis Family Foundation

Its FY2020 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$12k
Granted FY2019
7
Grants FY2019
2
States reached
$5k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead

Read this first · the figures below need context

99% of Davis Family Foundation’s FY2020 grant dollars went to Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program, not to grantees.

Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2020 names 0 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2019, the last year Davis Family Foundation named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $12k. It is dated, not current.

Organizations named directly on the return

12
’17
6
’18
5
’19
0
’20

Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.

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 2020.

Philanthropy$95kEducation$18kEnvironment$17kHuman Services$14kYouth Development$3kHealth$2kAnimals$1kReligion$500Other$0
02FY2019 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$1,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$0
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BREAKTHROUGH AUSTIN$5,000
GALLATIN VALLEY LAND TRUST$2,500
ST ANDREWS SCHOOL$1,000
CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY$1,000
EAGLE MOUNT$1,000
THRIVE$1,000
HRDC$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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY17–20) land where the poverty rate runs at 8%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 33% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%GALLATIN VALLEY LAND TRUST: $3k → 10%EARTH JUSTICE: $3k → 10%PLANNED PARENTHOOD: $500 → 17%ST ANDREWS SCHOOL: $1k → 10%THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $3k → 14%VANGUARD CHARITABLE: $51k → 7%GALLATIN VALLEY LAND TRUST: $3k → 10%EARTH JUSTICE: $3k → 10%ST ANDREWS SCHOOL: $1k → 10%VANGUARD CHARITABLE: $40k → 7%GALLATIN VALLEY LAND TRUST: $2k → 10%FRIENDS OF ST ANDREWS: $600 → 10%THRIVE: $2k → 10%BREAKTHROUGH AUSTIN: $5k → 10%CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY: $1k → 10%BREAKTHROUGH AUSTIN: $5k → 10%THRIVE: $1k → 10%BREAKTHROUGH AUSTIN: $5k → 10%GREATER YELLOWSTONE COALITION: $1k → 10%GREATER YELLOWSTONE COALITION: $1k → 10%EAGLE MOUNT: $1k → 10%EAGLE MOUNT: $1k → 10%BOZEMAN AREA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1k → 10%EAGLE MOUNT: $1k → 10%CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY: $500 → 10%HRDC: $500 → 10%HEART OF THE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER: $1k → 10%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.

86%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$50k · 9 repeat orgs$8k to everyone else

9 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2019, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call). Read against FY2019, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

9
5

Total granted

$50k
$7k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+91%
+113%

Still filing today

89%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2020, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $600 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20
EnvironmentHealthEducationPhilanthropyAnimalsReligionOther
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

  • B
    BREAKTHROUGH
    3× · 2017–2019 · $15k · revenue +199%
  • H
    HAVEN
    2× · 2017–2018 · $12k · revenue +91%
  • GV
    GALLATIN VALLEY LAND TRUST
    3× · 2017–2019 · $7k · revenue +234%

Funded once

  • WQ
    WARRIORS & QUIET WATERS FOUNDATION INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $3k · revenue +219%
  • TW
    THE WILDERNESS SOCIETYgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $3k · revenue +27%
  • HO
    HEART OF THE VALLEY INCgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $1k · revenue +56%
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
Gallatin Watershed Council Inc

The Gallatin Watershed Council guides collaborative watershed stewardship in the Gallatin Valley for a healthy and productive landscape.

Environment
2
Wyoming Outdoor Council

The wyoming outdoor council's mission is to protect wyoming's environment and quality of life now and for future generations.

Environment
3
Flathead Land Trust

Flathead land trust is dedicated to the conservation of northwest montana's land and water legacy through voluntary agreements with private land owners. flt's primary program service is private land conservation through voluntary…

Environment
4
Wildearth Guardians

Wildearth guardians works to protect and restore the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the american west.

Unclassified
5
Rocky Mountain Wild

Rocky mountain wild works to protect, connect, and restore wildlife and wild lands in the southern rocky mountain region. we work to secure the biodiversity of the mountains, plains, and desert ecosystems of colorado, wyoming, utah, and…

Environment
6
Cowiche Canyon Conservancy

Protecting our shrub-steppe and connecting people to this vanishing landscape.

—
7
Aspen Valley Land Trust

Protecting the open land and special places of the roaring fork and middle colorado river valleys for wildlife, agriculture, and community forever.

Environment
8
Minnesota Land Trust

The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.

Environment
9
Grand Teton Association

The mission of the association is to inspire "deeper connection, better understanding, and enduring support for our public lands."

Arts & Culture
10
Methow Valley Trails Collaborative

Enhancing sustainable trail experiences in the Methow Valley.

Environment
11
The Montana Land Reliance

The mission of the montana land reliance (mlr) is to partner with landowners to provide permanent protection for private lands that are significant for agricultural production, fish and wildlife habitat, and open space.

Environment
12
The Land Trust for Tennessee Inc

To conserve the unique character of tennessee's natural and historic landscapes and sites for future generations.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Greater Yellowstone Coalition; the most unlike its peers is Earthjustice. 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

14 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. 14 of the 18 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)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
13/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM: $90,716 · PhilanthropyVANGUARD CHARITABLE ENDOWMENT PROGRAM+2 more: $4,000 · PhilanthropyHAVEN: $11,500 · OtherHAVENTHRIVE INC: $2,500 · OtherTHRIVE INCST ANDREWS SCHOOL: $2,000 · OtherST ANDREWS SC…FRIENDS OF ST ANDREWS: $600 · Other+2 more: $1,000 · Other+2 moreGALLATIN VALLEY LAND TRUST: $7,000 · EnvironmentGALLATIN VAL…EARTHJUSTICE: $5,000 · EnvironmentEARTHJUSTICETHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $2,500 · EnvironmentTHE WILDERNE…GREATER YELLOWSTONE COALITION: $2,000 · EnvironmentGREATER YELL…BREAKTHROUGH: $15,000 · EducationBREAKTHROUG…WARRIORS & QUIET WATERS FOUNDATION INC: $2,500 · HealthCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY OF MONTANA: $1,500 · HealthHEART OF THE VALLEY INC: $1,000 · AnimalsGALLATIN COUNTY LOVE INC: $500 · Religion
Philanthropy$94,716Other$17,600Environment$16,500Education$15,000Health$4,000Animals$1,000Religion$500

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetBREAKTHROUGH: $15,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetHAVEN: $11,500 over 2y, 0.9% of budgetGALLATIN VALLEY LAND TRUST: $7,000 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetEARTHJUSTICE: $5,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetEagle Mount: $3,000 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetWARRIORS & QUIET WATERS FOUNDATION INC: $2,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetTHRIVE INC: $2,500 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $2,500 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetGREATER YELLOWSTONE COALITION: $2,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY OF MONTANA: $1,500 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetHEART OF THE VALLEY INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetONE VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetGALLATIN COUNTY LOVE INC: $500 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.

Gilhousen Family Foun…First Interstate Banc…Bozeman Deaconess Hea…One Valley Community …The Susan Kay Pederso…First Security Bank F…Morgan Family Foundat…Yellowstone Club Comm…Town Pump Charitable …Dennis & Phyllis Wash…Otto Bremer TrustVanguard Charitable E…
Gilhousen Family FoundationMT17.9× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gilhousen Family Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Bozeman Deaconess Health Services · One Valley Community Foundation · The Susan Kay Pederson Foundation · First Security Bank Foundation · Morgan Family Foundation Inc · Yellowstone Club Community Foundation · Town Pump Charitable Foundation · Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program

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 Davis Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Davis Family 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    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.

    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 18 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 2019, released 2019. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Davis Family’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