How much did HOPA MOUNTAIN INC grant in FY2024?

HOPA MOUNTAIN INC reported 1 grants totaling $172,577 in its FY2024 IRS filing.

Where is HOPA MOUNTAIN INC based?

HOPA MOUNTAIN INC is based in MT.

HOPA MOUNTAIN INC

Foundation Dossiers Mostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →

· Public charity

HOPA MOUNTAIN INC

hopa mountain invests in rural and tribal citizen leaders, adults, and youth who are improving education, ecological health, and economic development.

$173k

Granted FY2024

Grants

Communities

$10k

Largest

01What you fund

0161% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant clustered by its grantee’s IRS cause code (NTEE), by year — across FY2017–2024.

Human Services$324kEducation$218kCommunity Improvement$194kArts & Culture$154kFood & Nutrition$140kPublic Benefit$22kEnvironment$11kCivil Rights$10kHealth$10kOther$688k

02beneath the categories

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Beneath the NTEE codes, this is what the grant descriptions actually say.

…and in their own words, year by year

2018

—

2019

blackfoot language

2020

businessveterans veteransinformationboxesjusticebuildingpromotion

2021

food securityfood sovereigntyfastcitizenssecurity nutritionblackfeet nationfood secure

2022

covidstrengthenarleebuildingfosterindigenous people's

2023

confed salishsalish kootenaitraditionalknowledgeenvironmentculturalnutrition

Words distinctive to each year’s grant purposes (TF-IDF) · event-driven terms in cyan.

03FY2024 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

$10,000

Median grant

States reached

$3.0M

Total assets

Largest grants

Root Cellar Foods$10,000

02The need

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY20–23, $122k) land where the poverty rate runs at 13% — the area typically sits at 11%. 20% of those dollars reach neighborhoods with above-average need. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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; 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, United Way ALICE — shown as context about the area, never attributed to your giving.

03Your edge

repeat funding

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.

54%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.

$958k · 11 repeat orgs$812k to everyone else

And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +100% since the first grant, against +18% for the ones you funded once.

11 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2024, 11 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$958k

$802k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+100%

+18%

Still filing today

91%

73%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

Human ServicesEducationCommunity ImprovementArts & CultureFood & NutritionPublic BenefitOther

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

SG
Seventh Gen Fund Indian Dev
4× · 2019–2022 · $202k · revenue +54%
PI
Piegan Institute
5× · 2017–2023 · $130k · revenue +34%
FB
FAST Blackfeet
3× · 2020–2023 · $128k · revenue +100%

Funded once

CS
Confed Salish & Kootenai
one grant, 2023 · $200k
The Nature Conservancy
one grant, 2023 · $100k · revenue -2%
WF
WILD Foundation
one grant, 2023 · $70k · revenue -14%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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 Indigenous Food Sovereignty

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…

Food & Nutrition

Beaverhead Trails Coalition

Enhancement and development of trails on public lands in Beaverhead County

Environment

Northern California Indian

Research, develop, and administer social and economic development programs to meet the needs of indian and native american communities.

—

Cankdeska Cikana Community College

Cccc provides opportunities that lead to student independence and self-sufficiency through academic achievement and continuation of spirit lake dakota language and culture.

Education

Cook Inlet Tribal Council

Citc's (cook inlet tribal council) mission is to work in partnership with alaska native/american indian individuals to connect them to opportunities that fulfill their potential through education and training, child and family services,…

Human Services

Tanana Chiefs Conference

Tanana Chiefs Conference provides a unified voice in advancing sovereign tribal governments through the promotion of physical and mental wellness, education, socioeconomic development, and culture of the interior Alaska native people.

Health

Mountain Plains Community Development

The mission of MPCDC is to support and foster the work of the Coalition to strengthen the economic health of Native communities in the Mountain Plains region of Wyoming Montana South Dakota and North Dakota

Community Improvement

Chief Dull Knife College

Provide educational and cultural leadership to the residents of the northern cheyenne reservation and surrounding commmunities.

—

Minneapolis American Indian Center

The Organization's mission is to provide excellent services witin a foundation of cultural values that help meet the needs of the American Indian community. The Organization offers services to the American Indian community in Minneapolis,…

Human Services

Indigenous Regeneration

Indigenous Regeneration exists to inspire Native Communities on re-generative living concepts, through food cultivation, medicinal farming, culture, and eco-village educational programs, to achieve re-indigenization and true Tribal…

Youth Development

College of the Menominee Nation

To provide opportunities in higher education to its students as an institution of higher education chartered by the menominee people, the college infuses this education with american indian culture, preparing students for leadership,…

—

Montana Native Growth Fund

Our mission is to promote self-sustaining economic development for native americans by offering capacity-building access to capital and culturally empowered support to grow native homes and communities.

Community Improvement

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Messengers for Health and the most unlike its peers is Autry Museum of the American West. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.

the sector your giving your giving is ahead of the sector the sector’s ahead of you· dot size = how much the theme matters to each side

Ordered by the change in your giving — leaning in on top, pulling back at the bottom. The bar between the two dots is how out of step you are with the sector. Hover any row for detail.

Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.

Your grantees are a median of 28 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 6% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 6% lost their exemption, against 7% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund

2/34

the rest of the field

714/9,938

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.

05the grantee network

27 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Each one resolved to its own IRS returns and tracked year by year — your grant beside their revenue.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

26/27

Grantees still filing

18/27

Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

Other$718,512Human Services$324,100Education$217,658Community Improvement$193,750Arts & Culture$153,750Food & Nutrition$140,000Public Benefit$21,750

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.

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.

First Nations Development InstituteCO33.8× affinity14 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: First Nations Development Institute · The Kendeda Fund · Montana Community Foundation Inc · Montana Healthcare Foundation · Seventh Generation Fund · The Steele-Reese Foundation Xxxxx1004 · Otto Bremer Trust · Ndn Collective Inc · Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · Oro y Plata Foundation · Potlatch Fund · Charlotte y Martin Foundation-Ima

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 organisation HOPA MOUNTAIN 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.

2024

’20’21’22’23’24

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

0rely on government for over half their income

typical government reliance, FY20–24

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. 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.

05Through Plinth

Through Plinth

Your grantmaking, live and operational

This dossier was generated cold from public filings. In Plinth it’s a working system — every applicant assessed and every grant monitored. Here’s a taste, run on one of your grantees: Piegan Institute.

Agentic due diligence · confidence × risk

Financial management

low risk

~17 months of operating runway; revenue grew over 8 filed years.

Track record & reputation

low risk

8 years of Form 990 filings, still active.

Legal standing

low risk

US 501(c)(3); EIN 363566677 on file with current IRS Form 990 filings.

Governance

Live in Plinth

Board composition & governance documents — verified live in Plinth from the applicant.

Compliance & sanctions

Live in Plinth

OFAC / UN sanctions screening — run live in Plinth at assessment.

Program capacity

Live in Plinth

Staffing, M&E and activity alignment — assessed live in Plinth from submitted proposals.

Live · Plinth’s real DD engine

Run the actual assessment on Piegan Institute, cold from public data.

Generated live from public IRS filings + open web sources by Plinth’s agentic engine. Shown as an illustration of the product, not a formal assessment.

Post-award monitoring · continuous checks

On trackFinancial stability— Roughly 17 months of cash on hand.
On trackSustained operations— Filing through 2024; revenue grew over the period.
On trackReliance on your funding— Your grants peaked at 13% of their budget — diversified.
Awaiting reportEvidence of delivery— Plinth collects the grantee's own monitoring reports post-award.

What you see here is static and public. In Plinth it’s operational — the full six-pillar framework on every applicant (with their own documents + live registry and sanctions checks), monitoring dashboards on every award, custom board reports, and eligibility routing for intake.

Agentic due diligenceMonitoring dashboardsCustom board reportsEligibility routing

Preview generated from this grantee’s public IRS filings and independent reporting. Pillars marked “live in Plinth” require the applicant’s submitted documents. Shown as illustration, not a formal assessment.

Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPro

How do I get to Hopa Mountain Inc?

Find your warmest path to Hopa Mountain Inc through people who sit on both boards. Search for your organization and Plinth traces the introduction across shared trustees and officers.

Every link is a documented governance overlap in public IRS 990 filings — not a personal network — and each hop carries its own confidence tier. Low-confidence or distant paths are held back rather than guessed.

HOPA MOUNTAIN INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

27 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Hopa Mountain Inc?

More from the funding graph

HOPA MOUNTAIN INC

What you funded, over time

Past the labels — and the year it shifted

Where the money goes

Do your dollars go where the need is?

Who you back again

Backed again, and grew

Funded once

27 grantees, every filing reconciled, 2017–2025.

Government reliance of your grantees

Your grantmaking, live and operational

How do I get to Hopa Mountain Inc?

More from the funding graph