· Private foundation
McCRUM FUND INC
Its FY2025 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
Read this first · the figures below need context
87% of McCRUM FUND INC’s FY2025 grant dollars went to Park County Community Foundation, not to grantees.
Its money now reaches organizations through that sponsor, which does not report who recommended each grant. FY2025 names 2 organizations directly, so a portfolio cannot be read from it. Everything below is therefore FY2020, the last year McCRUM FUND INC named its own grantees at scale: 5 organizations, $95k. It is dated, not current.
Organizations named directly on the return
Amber years are those where most dollars went to a sponsor.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2025.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2020
- Under $10k4 grants · $9k
- $10k–50k3 grants · $36k
- $50k–250k1 grant · $50k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| SHANE LALANI CENTER FOR THE ARTS | $50,000 |
| PARK COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION | $16,000 |
| LIVINGSTON HLTHCARE FOUNDATION | $10,000 |
| NO BARRIERS USA | $10,000 |
| FARM TO SCHOOL | $5,000 |
| LIVINGSTON FOOD PANTRY | $2,000 |
| ST ANDREWS EPISCOPAL CHURCH | $1,000 |
| UTEC | $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.
Your human-services grants (FY25–25, $10k) 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.
8 repeat relationships — 5 still active in FY2020, 3 since wound down; 8 grantees were first funded in FY2020 (too recent to call). Read against FY2020, the last year this funder named its own grantees directly; its giving has since run through a sponsor, which reports no donor behind each grant.
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 FY2025, 9% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
- TSThe Shane Lalani Center for the Arts2× · 2020–2021 · $60k · revenue +103%
- BDBozeman Deaconess Foundation3× · 2017–2019 · $12k · revenue +1%
- ASASPEN-ABUSE SUPPORT & PREVENTION EDUCATION NETWORK2× · 2022–2024 · $2k · revenue +148%
Funded once
- PCPARK COUNTY COMMUNITY FUNDone grant, 2017 · $50k
- LELIVINGSTON EDUCATION FOUNDATIONone grant, 2018 · $5k
- LLLEUKEMA LYMPHOMA SOCIETYone grant, 2019 · $5k
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.
PCEC works with our community to safeguard the land, water, wildlife, and people of Yellowstone's northern gateway through grassroots organizing and community advocacy.
None
The mission of st. luke community healthcare is to remain an integral component of the communities of the mission valley through the delivery of personal, compassionate, quality health care in a dignified manner that values our patients,…
Excellence in patient-centered care.
Partnership health center ensures that accessible, comprehensive primary healthcare is provided to the medically underserved population in our region, through a partnership of community resources.
The mission of Blue Mountain Clinic is to provide individualized, choice-based healthcare that respects the power of personal connection.
Planned Parenthood of Montana empowers all people to make informed decisions and ensures the freedom to manage their own sexuality, and personal health by providing the highest quality confidential healthcare services, education, and…
Estes Park Health Foundation increases community awareness of Estes Park Health (EPH). The Foundation develops, manages, and distributes funds to assist them in fulfilling their mission.
To provide therapeutic care and support for the safe and healthy development of children and families.
To provide the opportunity and means for friends and neighbors to give financial support to Glendive Medical Center.
Mountain park health center works with the communities it serves to sustain and improve health by providing affordable primary care to those who need it most. our commitment to the community is to keep healthcare affordable and accessible.
End hunger together.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Livingston Healthcare Foundation and the most unlike its peers is Aspen-Abuse Support & Prevention Education Network. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
14 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. 14 of the 22 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 PARK COUNTY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds The Shane Lalani Center for the Arts ↗
- Who funds TALL TIMBERS RESEARCH INC ↗
- Who funds Friends of Park County ↗
- Who funds NO BARRIERS USA ↗
- Who funds LIVINGSTON FOOD PANTRY OF PARK COUNTY ↗
- Who funds Bozeman Deaconess Foundation ↗
- Who funds BRING CHANGE 2 MIND ↗
- Who funds Livingston Healthcare Foundation ↗
- Who funds THE NEW CANAAN COUNTRY SCHOOL INCORPORATED ↗
- Who funds GLOBAL MIDWIFE EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds ASPEN-ABUSE SUPPORT & PREVENTION EDUCATION NETWORK ↗
- Who funds COMMUNITY HEALTH PARTNERS INC ↗
- Who funds UTEC 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: Park County Community Foundation · The Stake Foundation · Solid Rock Foundation Co Rosamond Stanton · The Arthur M Blank Family Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · The Community Foundation for Greater Atlanta Inc · The Dovana Foundation Inc · The Kendeda Fund · Charlotte & Edward K Wheeler Foundation · Greater Gallatin United Way Inc · Glassybaby Foundation · Town Pump Charitable 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 McCRUM FUND 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.
- Utec Inc — 46% of income from government
- Tall Timbers Research Inc — 10% 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.