Skip to content
Montana Higher Education Student Assistance Corporation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Montana Higher Education Student Assistance Corporation

Mhesac offers borrower benefits in the form of principal and interest rate reductions to existing student loan borrowers.

$422k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$63k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Youth Development$542kEducation$339kCommunity Improvement$67kEmployment$6k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $62,500, the rows itemized in this filing. The $422,212 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $359,712 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.
$62,500
Median grant
1
States reached
$280M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF COMMUNITY SERVICE$62,500
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 43% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 11%MISSOULA COLLEGE: $10k → 9%UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA - MISSOULA: $52k → 9%MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY - BILLINGS: $12k → 9%MONTANA FFA FOUNDATION: $15k → 10%UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA - WESTERN: $9k → 12%ALBERTON JOINT SCHOOL DISTRICT #2: $5k → 13%MONTANA TECH OF THE UM & COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY: $58k → 16%HARDIN HIGH SCHOOL: $20k → 23%MISSOULA COLLEGE: $8k → 9%BILLINGS PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $10k → 9%MONTANA FFA FOUNDATION: $15k → 10%HIGHLANDS COLLEGE: $8k → 16%MONTANA FFA FOUNDATION: $10k → 10%HIGHLANDS COLLEGE: $6k → 16%MONTANA FFA FOUNDATION: $6k → 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 grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

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

85%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$805k · 7 repeat orgs$147k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
9

Total granted

$805k
$147k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-15%
+18%

Still filing today

43%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
EducationYouth DevelopmentCommunity ImprovementRecreation & SportsOther
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

  • DO
    DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
    9× · 2017–2025 · $486k
  • TU
    THE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA
    3× · 2017–2022 · $78k
  • MT
    MONTANA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
    3× · 2017–2024 · $71k

Funded once

  • MS
    MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY
    one grant, 2017 · $75k
  • HS
    HARDIN SCHOOL DISTRICT 17H 1
    one grant, 2020 · $20k
  • MB
    MSU BILLINGS
    one grant, 2017 · $12k
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
04the grantee network

6 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. 6 of the 16 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)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
6/6
Grantees still filing
3/6
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES: $485,500 · OtherDEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICESTHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA: $78,000 · OtherTHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANAMONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY: $75,000 · OtherMONTANA STATE UNIVERSITYMONTANA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY: $71,025 · OtherMONTANA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITYMONTANA COLLEGE ATTAINMENT NETWORK: $58,200 · OtherMONTANA COLLEGE ATTAINMENT NETWORKMONTANA CHAMBER FOUNDATION: $46,625 · OtherMONTANA CHAMBER FOUNDATION+5 more: $51,500 · Other+5 moreMONTANA FFA FOUNDATION INC: $46,000 · Youth DevelopmentMONTANA COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC: $20,000 · Community ImprovementHELENA EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $10,250 · EducationMONTANA SCHOOL COUNSELOR ASSOCIATION: $5,056 · EducationMONTANA POST SECONDARY EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES COUNCIL: $5,000 · Recreation & Sports
Other$865,850Youth Development$46,000Community Improvement$20,000Education$15,306Recreation & Sports$5,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100kgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMONTANA CHAMBER FOUNDATION: $46,625 over 5y, 11% of budgetMONTANA FFA FOUNDATION INC: $46,000 over 4y, 2.7% of budgetMONTANA COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC: $20,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetHELENA EDUCATION FOUNDATION: $10,250 over 1y, 4.1% of budgetMONTANA SCHOOL COUNSELOR ASSOCIATION: $5,056 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetMONTANA POST SECONDARY EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES COUNCIL: $5,000 over 1y, 2.4% 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 MONTANA CHAMBER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MONTANA FFA FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds MONTANA COOPERATIVE DEVELOPMENT CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds HELENA EDUCATION FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds MONTANA SCHOOL COUNSELOR ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds MONTANA POST SECONDARY EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES COUNCIL ↗

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.

Town Pump Charitable …Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Town Pump Charitable FoundationMT13.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Town Pump Charitable Foundation · 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 Montana Higher Education Student Assistance Corporation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Montana Higher Education Student Assistance Corporation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%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
    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 Montana Higher Education Student Assistance Corporation?

    Find your warmest path to Montana Higher Education Student Assistance Corporation 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 16 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Montana Higher Education Student Assistance’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