· Private foundation
Margaret W Reed 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.
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.
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE | $5,000 |
| GIZMO CDA MAKERS SPACE | $5,000 |
| THE COMBUSTIBLE COMPANY | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $2,200 |
| TASK FORCE ON HUMAN RELATIONS | $2,000 |
| CDAIDE | $1,500 |
| PRINCETON UNIVERSITY | $1,000 |
| IDAHO HUMANITIES COUNCIL | $1,000 |
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.
Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 91% of your 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.
17 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2024, 12 since wound down; 3 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, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k 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
- ICIDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC5× · 2017–2024 · $35k · revenue +35%
- AFADVOCATES FOR THE WEST INC4× · 2019–2023 · $17k · revenue +169%
NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC3× · 2017–2021 · $8k · revenue +80%
Funded once
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2020 · $13k
- IGIndividual grant recipientone grant, 2021 · $10k
- IYIDAHO YOUTH RANCH INCgraduatedone grant, 2017 · $8k · revenue +140%
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.
To conserve functioning salmon/steelhead eco-system at watershed levels, integrate angling activities with basic scientific research, collect raw data, monitor environmental functions, salmon/steelhead population dynamics, public…
The Idaho Wildlife Federation (IWF) promotes the conservation of Idaho's wildlife heritage and legacy of sporting opportunities for the current and future generations.
The mission of the teton regional land trust is to conserve working farms and ranches, fish and wildlife habitat, and scenic open spaces in eastern idaho for this and future generations.
Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…
The organization pursues higher standards of news coverage of natural resources and the environment -- standards of accuracy, fairness, balance, depth and context.
Public interest law firm - the western environmental law center uses the power of the law to foster thriving, resilient western u.s. lands, waters, wildlife, and communities in the face of a changing climate. we envision a thriving west,…
The resource renewal institute facilitates the creation, development and implementation of practical strategies to solve the entire complex environmental problem by addressing it comprehensively.
Wwt's mission is to protect and restore water in rivers and streams across washington state. washington water trust restores and protects water in rivers and streams and promotes sustainable freshwater management in washington, and, more…
The intertribal agriculture council was founded in 1987 to pursue and promote the conservation, development and use of our agricultural resources of american indian and alaska native tribes.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Idaho Humanities Council Inc and the most unlike its peers is Cdaide Inc. 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.
24 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. 24 of the 45 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 IDAHO CONSERVATION LEAGUE INC ↗
- Who funds KOOTENAI ENVIRONMENTAL ALLIANCE ↗
- Who funds ADVOCATES FOR THE WEST INC ↗
- Who funds INLAND NORTHWEST OPERA INC ↗
- Who funds NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY INC ↗
- Who funds IDAHO YOUTH RANCH INC ↗
- Who funds THE SNAKE RIVER ALLIANCE EDUCATION FUND INC ↗
- Who funds KOOTENAI COUNTY TASK FORCE ON HUMAN RELATIONS ↗
- Who funds IDAHO HUMANITIES COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds MILLS COLLEGE ↗
- Who funds Innovia Foundation ↗
- Who funds SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds THE MONO LAKE FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds CDAIDE Inc ↗
- Who funds The Metropolitan Opera Guild Inc ↗
- Who funds COEUR DALENE PUBLIC LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Trustees of Princeton University ↗
- Who funds Idaho Mythweaver Inc ↗
- Who funds LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS INC ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION INSTITUTE INC ↗
- Who funds INTERNATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE INC ↗
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: Idaho Community Foundation Inc · Innovia Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile 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 Margaret W Reed 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.
- The Trustees of Princeton University — 11% 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Margaret W Reed Foundation?
Find your warmest path to Margaret W Reed 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.