Skip to content

· Private foundation

Mighty to Save Foundation

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.

$22k
Granted FY2025still arriving
8
Grants FY2025still arriving
4
States reached
$10k
Largest
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2020 to 2025.

International$40kReligion$27kYouth Development$2kHealth$1kFood & Nutrition$1kEnvironment$200Other$0
02FY2025 · 8 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2025

  • Under $10k7 grants · $12k
  • $10k–50k1 grant · $10k
$1,200
Median grant
4
States reached
$320k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
New Life International$10,000
Africa Inland Mission$6,200
Canyon View Church$1,500
Axia International$1,200
Care Net of Missoula$1,000
Montana Food Bank Network$1,000
Individual grant recipient$1,000
Emmas House$500
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 12%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 55% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 13%Montana Food Bank Network: $1k → 9%Restoring Hope Nepal: $2k → 11%Axia International: $1k → 16%Gospel Ambition: $1k → 15%Africa Inland Mission: $6k → 6%New Life International: $10k → 15%The Shack: $1k → 14%Care Net of Missoula: $1k → 9%Restoring Hope Nepal: $1k → 11%Africa Inland Mission: $5k → 6%New Life International: $6k → 15%Restoring Help Nepal: $1k → 11%Africa Inland Mission: $5k → 6%New Life International inc: $5k → 15%Canyon View Church: $2k → 11%Africa Inland Mission: $3k → 6%New Life International: $5k → 15%Canyon View Church: $1k → 11%AFRICA INLAND MISSION: $2k → 6%NEW LIFE INTERNATIONAL INC: $5k → 15%Emmas House: $500 → 11%ALTLINK: $1k → 6%NEW LIFE INTERNATIONAL INC: $5k → 15%Bitterroot Land Trust: $100 → 11%AFRICA INLAND MISSION: $800 → 6%Bitterroot Land Trust: $100 → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
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.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
04

Where the work is directed

The same grants placed two ways: where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose sends the money.

About 25% of Mighty to Save Foundation’s grant dollars are earmarked for a different county than the recipient’s own address. By recipient address, 13% of the giving stays in MT; by stated purpose, 9%.

Mighty to Save Foundationlessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address · 21% directed abroad (not shown)
How this is measured
Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the funder’s own 990 grant descriptions.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

88%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$63k · 5 repeat orgs$9k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +18% since the first grant, against +17% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 3 still active in FY2025, 2 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
4

Total granted

$63k
$4k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%
+17%

Still filing today

60%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 79% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $5k went to new ones.

50%100%’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’20’21’22’23’24’25
InternationalReligionEnvironmentPhilanthropyFood & NutritionOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). 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

  • NL
    New Life International Inc
    6× · 2020–2025 · $36k · revenue +588%
  • RH
    RESTORING HOPE NEPAL
    2× · 2023–2024 · $3k · revenue +18%
  • BR
    BITTER ROOT LAND TRUST
    2× · 2023–2024 · $200 · revenue +8%

Funded once

  • GA
    GOSPEL AMBITION INC
    one grant, 2024 · $1k
  • A
    ALTLINK
    one grant, 2020 · $1k
  • TS
    THE SHACK
    one grant, 2023 · $1k · revenue -18%
How this is measured

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

04Its field
05the grantee network

7 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 7 of the 14 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/7
Grantees still filing
5/7
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

New Life International Inc: $36,000 · InternationalNew Life International IncRESTORING HOPE NEPAL: $3,000 · InternationalRESTORING HOPE NEPALAFRICA INLAND MISSION INTERNATIONAL INCORPORATED: $21,500 · OtherAFRICA INLAND MISSION INTERNATIONAL INCORPORA…Canyon View Church: $2,500 · OtherCanyon View ChurchGOSPEL AMBITION INC: $1,200 · OtherALTLINK: $1,200 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $1,000 · OtherCare Net of Missoula: $1,000 · Other+1 more: $500 · OtherTHE SHACK: $1,200 · ReligionA Jesus Mission: $600 · ReligionAxia International: $1,200 · PhilanthropyMONTANA FOOD BANK NETWORK INC: $1,000 · Food & NutritionBITTER ROOT LAND TRUST: $200 · Environment
International$39,000Other$28,900Religion$1,800Philanthropy$1,200Food & Nutrition$1,000Environment$200

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetNew Life International Inc: $36,000 over 6y, 1.1% of budgetRESTORING HOPE NEPAL: $3,000 over 2y, 0.4% of budgetTHE SHACK: $1,200 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetMONTANA FOOD BANK NETWORK INC: $1,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetA Jesus Mission: $600 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetBITTER ROOT LAND TRUST: $200 over 2y, 0.0% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

  • Who funds New Life International Inc ↗
  • Who funds RESTORING HOPE NEPAL ↗
  • Who funds Axia International ↗
  • Who funds THE SHACK ↗
  • Who funds MONTANA FOOD BANK NETWORK INC ↗
  • Who funds A Jesus Mission ↗
  • Who funds BITTER ROOT LAND TRUST ↗

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Natl Christian Charitable Fdn IncGA8.5× affinity4 shared granteesties to 3 of 3Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Natl Christian Charitable Fdn Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Mighty to Save Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Mighty to Save Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%1%3%4%5%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    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 a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than 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 to 24 months.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Mighty to Save Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Mighty to Save 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 14 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Mighty to Save’s filings →

    More from the funding graph