Skip to content
Montana Food Bank Network Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Montana Food Bank Network Inc

Our mission: to end hunger in montana through food acquisition and distribution, education, and advocacy.

$30M
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$525k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $637,144, the rows itemized in this filing. The $29,640,486 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $29,003,342 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k4 grants · $24k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $89k
  • $250k+1 grant · $525k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$23M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
FAST BLACKFEET FOOD CENTER (O'YO'P' FOOD PANTRY)$525,000
GALLATIN VALLEY FOOD BANK$43,538
CENTER POLE FOUNDATION$20,000
ARLEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION$15,000
VALLEY COMMUNITY EMERGENCY FOOD BANK INC$10,000
ST VINCENT DE PAUL$7,192
TWIN BRIDGES MT FARMERS MARKET AND FOOD PANTRY$6,414
ST LABRE FOOD PANTRY$5,000
HELPING HANDS IN HARDIN$5,000
02The need
02

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:

Its human-services grants (FY24–24, $71k) land where the poverty rate runs at 14%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 38% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%ST VINCENT DE PAUL: $7k → 14%CENTER POLE FOUNDATION: $20k → 23%GALLATIN VALLEY FOOD BANK: $44k → 10%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.
03Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Carbon County Community Food Bank

Carbon County Community Food Bank is dedicated to reducing hunger in Carbon County by providing food to individuals in need.

Community Improvement
2
Foothills Food Bank

The Foothills Food Bank works to ensure access to quality, nutritious food to community members in need, and deliver services with respect and dignity.

—
3
Fairview Food Bank

Providing food for those in need.

Food & Nutrition
4
South County Community Food Bank

Providing nutritious food to low income families and individuals in south clatsop county

Food & Nutrition
5
Loon Lake Food Pantry & Resource Center Inc

The Mission of Loon Lake Food Pantry & Resource Center is to feed the hungry and provide food to persons in need, to establish support systems that promote and maintain the food bank, and to assist in the resource development and growth of…

—
6
Brandon Area Food Pantry

To assist families and individuals in the Brandon, SD area meet emergency food needs at little or no cost.

Food & Nutrition
7
Browns Valley Food Shelf Inc
Food & Nutrition
8
Cumby Food Pantry

food pantry

Food & Nutrition
9
Prairie Ridge Food Pantry

tohelpfightfoodinsecurity.wereviveandgivedonatedfooditemstothoselessfortunate.

Food & Nutrition
10
German Valley Food Pantry
Food & Nutrition
11
Sunshine Bend Community Development Corp

Food bank for needy

Food & Nutrition
12
Mountain Home Food Basket

To provide food to disadvantaged individuals and families.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Missoula Food Bank & Community Center; the most unlike its peers is Anaconda Ministerial Project Care. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
03the grantee network

66 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.

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

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
28
Early backer (in before they grew)
63/66
Grantees still filing
48/66
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

FAST BLACKFEET: $525,000 · Food & NutritionFAST BLACKFEET+1 more: $10,000 · Food & NutritionHUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF DISTRICT IX INC: $43,538 · Human ServicesHUMAN RESOUR…Center Pole: $20,000 · Human ServicesCenter PoleCASCADE COUNTY COUNCIL OF THE SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL: $7,192 · Human ServicesCASCADE COUN…ARLEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $15,000 · Community ImprovementTWIN BRIDGES-MT FARMERS MARKET AND FOOD PANTRY: $6,414 · OtherST LABRE INDIAN SCHOOL: $5,000 · OtherHelping Hands in Hardin Inc: $5,000 · Civil Rights
Food & Nutrition$535,000Human Services$70,730Community Improvement$15,000Other$11,414Civil Rights$5,000

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 budgetFAST BLACKFEET: $525,000 over 6y, 40% of budgetHUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF DISTRICT IX INC: $43,538 over 5y, 0.1% of budgetCenter Pole: $20,000 over 9y, 1.2% of budgetARLEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $15,000 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetCASCADE COUNTY COUNCIL OF THE SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL: $7,192 over 9y, 0.2% of budgetHelping Hands in Hardin Inc: $5,000 over 9y, 2.2% 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 FAST BLACKFEET ↗
  • Who funds HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF DISTRICT IX INC ↗
  • Who funds Center Pole ↗
  • Who funds ARLEE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
  • Who funds VALLEY COMMUNITY EMERGENCY FOOD BANK INC ↗
  • Who funds CASCADE COUNTY COUNCIL OF THE SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL ↗
  • Who funds Helping Hands in Hardin Inc ↗

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.

Dennis & Phyllis Wash…Town Pump Charitable …Gianforte Family Char…Headwaters Health Fou…Montana Community Fou…First Interstate Banc…Oro y Plata FoundationSample Foundation IncOtto Bremer TrustThe Homestead Foundat…The Steele-Reese Foun…Montana Healthcare Fo…
Dennis & Phyllis Washington FoundationMT140× affinity74 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · Town Pump Charitable Foundation · Gianforte Family Charitable Trust · Headwaters Health Foundation of Western Montana · Montana Community Foundation Inc · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Oro y Plata Foundation · Sample Foundation Inc · Otto Bremer Trust · The Homestead Foundation Inc · The Steele-Reese Foundation Xxxxx1004 · Montana Healthcare 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 Montana Food Bank Network Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Montana Food Bank Network Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%13%28%50%funder's share of their income ↑0%4%8%11%15%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 · 0–15%
    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.

    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 9 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 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports $29M of grant expense, but none of it to a named recipient. On a Form 990 that can mean grants abroad, filed by region only (Schedule F), grants under $5,000, which are not itemized, or a schedule referenced as an attachment the e-file does not carry. The figures above are therefore from FY2024, the most recent year this funder named its grantees.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Montana Food Bank Network’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home