· Private foundation
Kreilick Family Foundation Inc
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 FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k22 grants · $56k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $47k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| DEBORAH'S PLACE | $25,000 |
| AMAZON WATCH | $12,000 |
| WILD ROCKIES FIELD INSTITUTE INC | $10,000 |
| COMMUNITY COLLEGE PARTNERS PROGRAM | $8,000 |
| GENE SLAYS BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB | $7,500 |
| O'FALLON AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY | $5,000 |
| FLATHEAD-LOLO-BITTERROOT CITIZEN TASK FORCE | $4,500 |
| ALMOST HOME | $3,000 |
| LOS CEDROS FUND | $3,000 |
| MASCOUTAH SENIOR CENTER | $3,000 |
| ST JOSEPH HOUSING INITIATIVE | $2,500 |
| MONTANA ASSOCIATION OF SYMPHONY ORCHESTRAS | $2,500 |
| BUFFALO FIELD CAMPAIGN | $2,500 |
| ARLEE COMMUNITY CENTER CORP | $2,500 |
| KEYWAY CENTER FOR DIVERSITY AND REENTRY | $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 (FY19–22, $7k) land where the poverty rate runs at 17%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 86% 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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +41% since the first grant, against +33% for the ones you funded once.
33 repeat relationships — 15 still active in FY2024, 18 since wound down; 10 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, 72% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $29k 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
- DPDEBORAH'S PLACE8× · 2017–2024 · $143k · revenue +130%
- WRWILD ROCKIES FIELD INSTITUTE INC3× · 2022–2024 · $18k · revenue +226%
- TUTHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATION4× · 2018–2024 · $13k · revenue +41%
Funded once
THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INCone grant, 2023 · $12k · revenue +1%- BGBOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF HARLEM INCgraduatedone grant, 2018 · $10k · revenue +75%
- TCTHE CENTER FOR IMPACT COMMUNICATIONS INCone grant, 2019 · $8k · revenue -89%
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.
Grist is an independent, non profit media organization dedicated to reporting on climate change.
To cultivate leaders and community partnerships to advance environmental justice.
New Roots Institute is a nonprofit empowering the next generation with knowledge and training to end factory farming.
Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.
Rogue Climate's mission is to empower Southern Oregon communities most impacted by climate change including low-income, rural, youth, seniors & communities of color, to win climate justice by organizing for clean energy, sustainable jobs &…
The charitable activities of the Good Work Institute are designed to strengthen collaboration; address legacies of unequal power; and encourage a transition to regenerative ecological and social systems.
Our mission is to empower and support runners and walkers of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds in Missoula. With a vibrant community of over 2,400 members, we provide a welcoming space for like-minded individuals to connect and explore…
To establish and promote programs to protect the global climate, forests, wildlife and the natural environment, through research, advocacy, and investigation.
The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…
Natural History Institute is organized to provide leadership and resources for a revitalized practice of natural history that integrates art, science, and humanities to promote the health and well-being of humans and the rest of the…
Empowermt creates a more just and inclusive society by developing youth and adult leaders who work to end mistreatment, correct systemic inequities, and strengthen communities. empowermt envisions a montana where each person is respected…
To promote free expression, academic freedom, viewpoint diversity, and open scientific inquiry in the MIT community
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Unleashing Potential and the most unlike its peers is Girls On Shred. 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.
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 27 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 8% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
44 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. 44 of the 76 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 DEBORAH'S PLACE ↗
- Who funds Community College Partners Program ↗
- Who funds WILD ROCKIES FIELD INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds WILDERNESS WATCH INC ↗
- Who funds THE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds BLUE ROSE COMPASS INC ↗
- Who funds Amazon Watch Inc ↗
- Who funds THE UNION OF CONCERNED SCIENTISTS INC ↗
- Who funds BACKYARD GROWERS INC ↗
- Who funds CENTER FOR WOMEN IN TRANSITION DBA KEYWAY CENTER FOR DIVERSION & REENTRY ↗
- Who funds BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF HARLEM INC ↗
- Who funds St Joseph Housing Initiative ↗
- Who funds AFTER SCHOOL MATTERS INC ↗
- Who funds THE CENTER FOR IMPACT COMMUNICATIONS INC ↗
- Who funds GREATER CHICAGO FOOD DEPOSITORY ↗
- Who funds MISSOULA FOOD BANK & COMMUNITY CENTER ↗
- Who funds Almost Home ↗
- Who funds Missoula Freestyle Team Inc ↗
- Who funds FREEDOM GARDENS ↗
- Who funds ENVIRONMENTAL VOTER PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds NARRATIVE THERAPY INITIATIVE INC ↗
- Who funds UNLEASHING POTENTIAL ↗
- Who funds National Economic and Social Rights Initiative ↗
- Who funds LUTHERAN CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES OF ILLINOIS ↗
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: United Way of Greater St Louis Inc · Employees Community Fund of the Boeing Company · St Louis Community Foundation Inc · Maki Foundation · Cross Charitable Foundation Attn John R Clark · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · St Louis Community Foundation · Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · Commerce Bancshares Foundation · Tides Foundation · Silicon Valley Community Foundation · Enterprise Holdings 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 Kreilick Family Foundation 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, a single department, or state — and drag the year to watch it move.
- Emerson College — 0% of income from government
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.