Skip to content

· Private foundation

Galen and Karla Zerbe Family Foundation

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.

$105k
Granted FY2024still arriving
16
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$15k
Largest
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2024.

Philanthropy$59kEducation$53kArts & Culture$44kReligion$37kRecreation & Sports$33kFood & Nutrition$30kCommunity Improvement$22kHealth$20kOther$0
02FY2024 · 16 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k12 grants · $60k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $45k
$5,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$2.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
THE CHILDREN'S MUSEUM OF NORTHEAST MONTANA$15,000
VALLEY COUNTY HOPE PROJECT$10,000
VALLEY COMMUNITY EMERGENCY FOOD BANK$10,000
GLASGOW PUBLIC SCHOOLS$10,000
VALLEY COUNTY 4-H COUNCIL$6,000
FORT PECK FINE ARTS COUNCIL$6,000
LIVE LIKE JACE FOUNDATION$5,000
WOLF POINT POUND PUPPIES$5,000
MILK RIVER INC$5,000
CHASE HAWKS MEMORIAL ASSOCIATION$5,000
KINGDOM OVERFLOW MINITRIES$5,000
LOVE & SONSHINE MINISTRIES$5,000
BIG SKY BRAVERY$5,000
PORCUPINE BOOSTER CLUB$5,000
TWO RIVERS ECONOMIC GROWTH$5,000
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 (FY21–24, $15k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%DOG TAG BUDDIES: $5k → 9%MILK RIVER INC: $5k → 12%MILK RIVER INC: $5k → 12%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.

79%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$312k · 15 repeat orgs$81k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +21% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

15 repeat relationships: 11 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

15
12

Total granted

$312k
$58k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+21%
0%

Still filing today

53%
42%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 78% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $23k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23’24
ReligionHuman ServicesHealthEducationArts & CultureInternationalOther
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 CHILDRENS MUSEUM OF NORTHEAST MT
    4× · 2021–2024 · $35k · revenue +51%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF CASA BERNABE
    2× · 2021–2022 · $16k · revenue +21%
  • PI
    PROVISION INTERNATIONAL INC
    2× · 2022–2023 · $10k · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • VC
    VALLEY COUNTY FOOD BANK
    one grant, 2022 · $8k
  • LC
    LUSTRE CHRISTIAN HIGH SCHOOL
    one grant, 2023 · $8k
  • VV
    VALLEY VIEW HOME
    one grant, 2021 · $6k · revenue +14%
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
Eastern Montana Veterans Home Foundation
Human Services
2
Mountain Home Montana Inc

To provide a safe, stable , and nurturing home where young mothers can discover their strengths, and their children can experience the joys of childhood.

Human Services
3
Valley Mission Inc

Valley Mission currently operates a Food Pantry. New services offered in the new facility will inlcude an 18-bed emergency shelter, commercial kitchen/dining area, office space, medical clinic, 16-bed transformational living program (6…

Human Services
4
Valkyrie Ranch Inc

Our mission at valkyrie ranch is to support special operations veterans and their families with healing, connection, and lifelong care while also giving back to the ranching community around us. through outdoor retreats, recovery programs,…

Human Services
5
Montana Veterans Foundation Inc

The montana veterans foundation is designed to assist homeless veterans (or veterans at risk of homelessness) by improving their quality of life and by providing comprehensive support which enables veterans to achieve greater…

—
6
Salt Creek Ministries Inc

To provide an environment for women to find their full potential through jesus christ, and to become role models through their faith that will continue on in their homes, churches, and community

—
7
Montana On a Mission

Montana on a Mission exists to encourage people to live out the love of jesus christ.

Human Services
8
Center for Restorative Youth Justice

The center for restorative youth justice (cryj) works to actively engage youth, victimes, families, communities in restorative programming that interrupts cycles of harm. our programs create opportunities for at-risk youth to deepen…

Human Services
9
Montana Rescue Mission

Montana rescue mission began in 1948 and was incorporated in 1957 to serve the homeless population in billings, mt and the surrounding area. our core values are to treat all people with dignity, compassion, and respect. our programs and…

—
10
Homeless Outreach Providing Encouragement

The mission of the organization is to provide life-sustaining services and programsfocusing on dignity, empowerment and self-sufficiency. the organization provides the onlyyear-round overnight service center for the homeless community in…

Human Services
11
Custer County Conference of the Society of St Vincent Depaul

Our mission is to help the less fortunate people in our community.

Human Services
12
Scenic Montana Trails
—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Alliance for Youth Inc; the most unlike its peers is Kingdom Overflow Ministries. 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

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 33 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/17
Grantees still filing
7/17
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

VALLEY COUNTY HOPE PROJECT INC: $50,000 · OtherVALLEY COUNTY HOPE PROJECT INCGLASGOW PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $45,000 · OtherGLASGOW PUBLIC SCHOOLSCITY OF GLASGOW POOL FUND: $25,000 · OtherCITY OF GLASGOW POOL FUNDTWO RIVERS ECONOMIC GROWTH: $21,500 · OtherTWO RIVERS ECONOMIC GROWTHIndividual grant recipient: $16,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientWOLF POINT POUND PUPPIES: $16,000 · OtherWOLF POINT POUND PUPPIESVALLEY COUNTY 4-H COUNCIL: $11,000 · OtherFORT PECK FINE ARTS COUNCIL: $9,000 · Other+15 more: $71,000 · Other+15 moreFRIENDS OF CASA BERNABE: $16,000 · ReligionFRIENDS OF …KINGDOM OVERFLOW MINISTRIES: $15,000 · ReligionKINGDOM OVE…LOVE AND SONSHINE MINISTRIES: $10,000 · ReligionLOVE AND SO…THE CHILDRENS MUSEUM OF NORTHEAST MT: $35,000 · EducationTHE CHILD…VALLEY COMMUNITY EMERGENCY FOOD BANK INC: $22,500 · Food & NutritionMILK RIVER INC: $10,000 · Human ServicesDOG TAG BUDDIES INC: $5,000 · Human ServicesVALLEY COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $9,000 · PhilanthropyCHASE HAWKS MEMORIAL ASSOCIATION INC: $5,000 · PhilanthropyPROVISION INTERNATIONAL INC: $10,000 · International
Other$264,500Religion$41,000Education$35,000Food & Nutrition$22,500Human Services$15,000Philanthropy$14,000International$10,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetTHE CHILDRENS MUSEUM OF NORTHEAST MT: $35,000 over 4y, 10% of budgetFRIENDS OF CASA BERNABE: $16,000 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetKINGDOM OVERFLOW MINISTRIES: $15,000 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetLOVE AND SONSHINE MINISTRIES: $10,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetPROVISION INTERNATIONAL INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetMILK RIVER INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetVALLEY COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION: $9,000 over 2y, 9.5% of budgetFORT PECK FINE ARTS COUNCIL: $9,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetVALLEY VIEW HOME: $6,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDOG TAG BUDDIES INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetBIG SKY BRAVERY FOUNDATION: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHORSES SPIRITS HEALING INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.7% of budgetCaring Hands Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 3.3% of budgetCHASE HAWKS MEMORIAL ASSOCIATION INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetALLIANCE FOR YOUTH INC: $2,500 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.

  • Who funds THE CHILDRENS MUSEUM OF NORTHEAST MT ↗
  • Who funds VALLEY COMMUNITY EMERGENCY FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDS OF CASA BERNABE ↗
  • Who funds KINGDOM OVERFLOW MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds LOVE AND SONSHINE MINISTRIES ↗
  • Who funds PROVISION INTERNATIONAL INC ↗
  • Who funds MILK RIVER INC ↗
  • Who funds VALLEY COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds FORT PECK FINE ARTS COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds VALLEY VIEW HOME ↗
  • Who funds DOG TAG BUDDIES INC ↗
  • Who funds BIG SKY BRAVERY FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds HORSES SPIRITS HEALING INC ↗
  • Who funds Caring Hands Inc ↗
  • Who funds LIVE LIKE JACE FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CHASE HAWKS MEMORIAL ASSOCIATION INC ↗
  • Who funds ALLIANCE FOR YOUTH INC ↗

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.

Montana Community Foundation IncMT15.3× affinity5 shared granteesties to 9 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Montana Community Foundation Inc · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Live Heregive Here-A Valley County Foundation · Harnish Foundation · Gianforte Family Charitable Trust · Edward Jones Foundation · American Endowment Foundation · Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · 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 Galen and Karla Zerbe Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Galen and Karla Zerbe Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%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
    3report 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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Galen and Karla Zerbe Family Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Galen and Karla Zerbe Family 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 33 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Galen and Karla Zerbe Family’s filings →

    More from the funding graph