· Private foundation
Gilhousen Family Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
The 35 grants below total $877,150 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $903,150 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $26,000 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 · FY2022
- Under $10k24 grants · $77k
- $10k–50k10 grants · $200k
- $250k+1 grant · $600k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| Yellowstone Theological Institute | $600,100 |
| Thrive | $30,000 |
| Intermountain | $25,000 |
| Greater Gallatin United Way | $23,000 |
| Help Center Inc | $22,300 |
| HRDC Housing (payee: HRDC District IX) | $20,000 |
| The Rock Youth Center | $20,000 |
| Haven | $17,500 |
| Deliver Fund | $15,000 |
| Community Health Partners | $15,000 |
| Providence Classical School | $12,000 |
| Belgrade Community Library Foundation | $9,000 |
| Holy Spirit Renewal Ministries | $8,000 |
| Greater Gallatin United Way | $8,000 |
| Intermountain Opera | $5,000 |
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 (FY18–18, $75k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 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 +84% since the first grant, against +26% for the ones you funded once.
54 repeat relationships — 27 still active in FY2022, 27 since wound down; 7 grantees were first funded in FY2022 (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 FY2022, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $15k 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
- YTYELLOWSTONE THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE2× · 2018–2021 · $1.5M · revenue +33% · 55% of their budget
- HCHELP CENTER INC2× · 2018–2021 · $172k · revenue +247%
- GGGREATER GALLATIN UNITED WAY INC2× · 2018–2021 · $130k · revenue +122%
Funded once
- MMMontana Meth Projectone grant, 2019 · $50k
- CIChildWise Instituteone grant, 2019 · $50k
- FPFamily Promise of Gallatin Valleyone grant, 2019 · $35k
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.
Montana center for the arts purpose is to nurture, promote and expand cultural engagement and opportunity in our region. through collaboration with the community at large, and in partnership with the area's diverse cultural and educational…
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…
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…
To inspire and foster creativity and a love of art through diverse and high quality exhibits programs classes and lectures.
The mission of Blue Mountain Clinic is to provide individualized, choice-based healthcare that respects the power of personal connection.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Bozeman Library Friends and Foundation and the most unlike its peers is American Computer Museum Ltd. 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 32 years old; the field is 13. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 25% startups (under 5 years old) — 6% of your grantees by number, and just 64% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 4% lost their exemption, against 9% 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.
50 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. 50 of the 130 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 YELLOWSTONE THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE ↗
- Who funds HELP CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER GALLATIN UNITED WAY INC ↗
- Who funds THRIVE INC ↗
- Who funds HAVEN ↗
- Who funds THE ROCK YOUTH CENTER ↗
- Who funds MONTANA METH PROJECT ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HEALTH PARTNERS INC ↗
- Who funds Intermountain Deaconess Childrens Services ↗
- Who funds FAMILY PROMISE OF GALLATIN VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY MEDIATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds Montana State University Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds BOZEMAN SYMPHONY SOCIETY ↗
- Who funds GALLATIN COUNTY LOVE INC ↗
- Who funds Belgrade Community Library Foundation ↗
- Who funds HEART OF THE VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds Belgrade Senior Center ↗
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: Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Town Pump Charitable Foundation · Gianforte Family Charitable Trust · Montana Community Foundation Inc · Treacy Foundation · Greater Gallatin United Way Inc · One Valley Community Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · Bozeman Deaconess Health Services · First Security Bank Foundation · The Arthur M Blank Family 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 Gilhousen Family Foundation 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 Gilhousen Family Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Gilhousen 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.