· Private foundation
Foundation for Community Vitality
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k11 grants · $37k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $169k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $58k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| People's Partners for Community Dev | $58,433 |
| Plenty Doors Community Development Corp | $40,000 |
| Messengers for Health | $40,000 |
| City of Lodge Grass | $35,781 |
| Leadership Montana | $24,000 |
| Little Big Horn College | $18,856 |
| Crow Tribe of Indians | $10,000 |
| Leadership Wyoming | $9,500 |
| Seventh Generation Fund | $7,892 |
| Montana State University | $4,740 |
| Thresh | $2,500 |
| Piikanii Lodge Health Institute | $2,500 |
| Blackfeet Indian Land Trust | $2,500 |
| Yellowstone Valley Animal Shelter | $2,500 |
| Project Hope | $2,000 |
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 (FY19–24, $329k) land where the poverty rate runs at 23%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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 +53% since the first grant, against +31% for the ones you funded once.
22 repeat relationships — 11 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 89% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $30k 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
- PDPLENTY DOORS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION5× · 2019–2024 · $307k · revenue ×13 · 48% of their budget
- MFMESSENGERS FOR HEALTH3× · 2021–2024 · $146k · revenue +47% · 31% of their budget
- TPTHE PEOPLES PARTNERS FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT3× · 2020–2022 · $146k · revenue +142%
Funded once
- BABoys and Girls Club of Northern Cheyenneone grant, 2019 · $137k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2019 · $100k
- PDPlenty Doors Community Development Groupone grant, 2022 · $79k
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.
Greater yellowstone coalition works with all people to protect the lands, waters, and wildlife of the greater yellowstone ecosystem, now and for future generations.
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…
Northern Plains believes people working together can make a difference. Our mission is to organize Montanans to protect our water, land, air, and working landscapes; support a healthy, localized, and sustainable economy in farm and ranch…
To promote science-based wildlife management that fosters ecosystem health and dynamic equilibrium between species throughout the state of wyoming.
To collaborate with people across the state on local, regenerative, and culturally specific food systems that aim to protect, cultivate, distribute, and increase access to indigenous foods through the exchange of knowledge, skills, and…
To inspire connections to the landscapes, water, wildlife, recreation and agricultural heritage of west-central montana through conservation, now and for future generations.
The wyoming outdoor council's mission is to protect wyoming's environment and quality of life now and for future generations.
Protecting our shrub-steppe and connecting people to this vanishing landscape.
To collectively serve as a catalyst for engagement and bonding of people to our wildlife and public lands in montana through a sense of place, education, access, research and stewardship.
Wyoming wildlife federation delivers leadership in conservation for the state's wildlife, hunters, anglers, and conservationists through policy, education, advocacy, and habitat.
Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative Programs Focus on Connecting and Protecting Habitat from Yellowstone to the Yukon so people and nature can thrive.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Wyoming Community Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Palm Springs Art Museum. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
Your grantees are a median of 19 years old; the field is 19. You back the younger end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 21% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 5% lost their exemption, against 10% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
35 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. 35 of the 72 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 Center Pole ↗
- Who funds PLENTY DOORS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds MESSENGERS FOR HEALTH ↗
- Who funds THE PEOPLES PARTNERS FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ↗
- Who funds THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ↗
- Who funds LEADERSHIP MONTANA INC ↗
- Who funds HOPA MOUNTAIN INC ↗
- Who funds Boys and Girls Club of Lodge Grass ↗
- Who funds LEADERSHIP WYOMING ↗
- Who funds SHERIDAN COMMUNITY LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds Montana State University Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds Helping Hands in Hardin Inc ↗
- Who funds Blue Bird LifeWays ↗
- Who funds BILLINGS COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BIGHORN RIVER ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds SEVENTH GENERATION FUND FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES INC ↗
- Who funds Piikani Lodge Health Institute ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL NATIVE AMERICAN HALL OF FAME ↗
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: First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Montana Community Foundation Inc · Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · Gianforte Family Charitable Trust · Northwest Area Foundation · First Nations Development Institute · Op & We Edwards Foundation Inc · Otto Bremer Trust · Seventh Generation Fund for Indigenous Peoples Inc · Hopa Mountain Inc · Donald & Carol Roberts Foundation in Memory of Virginia K Weston Inc · Oro y Plata 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 Foundation for Community Vitality 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Foundation for Community Vitality?
Find your warmest path to Foundation for Community Vitality 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.