· Public charity
Montana Homeownership Network Inc
Create sustainable homeownership opportunities and improve the availability of affordable rentals.
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 · FY2025
- $50k–250k7 grants · $634k
- $250k+3 grants · $901k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES INC OF GREAT FALLS | $321,960 |
| RURAL DYNAMICS INC | $321,199 |
| HOMEWORD INC | $257,899 |
| HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF DISTRICT IX | $160,047 |
| DISTRICT 7 HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT | $121,378 |
| ROCKY MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT CORP | $111,854 |
| DISTRICT XI HUMAN RESOURCE COUNCIL | $69,600 |
| COMMUNITY ACTION PARTNERSHIP OF MT | $67,583 |
| DISTRICT 6 HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT | $52,640 |
| HEADWATERS RG&D AREA INC | $51,115 |
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 (FY17–25, $2.0M) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 41% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.
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.
And the relationships you keep tend to grow: grantees you re-up on have seen median revenue of +36% since the first grant, against +23% for the ones you funded once.
15 repeat relationships — 9 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (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 FY2025, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $53k 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
- HIHOMEWORD INC9× · 2017–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +110%
- HRHUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF DISTRICT IX INC9× · 2017–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +97%
- D7DISTRICT 7 HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL INC9× · 2017–2025 · $894k · revenue +9%
Funded once
- BBBLUE BUNCH FLATS LLPPone grant, 2019 · $370k
- CCCASCADE COUNTY COUNCIL OF THE SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAULone grant, 2023 · $84k · revenue +23%
- CRCrosswinds Recoveryone grant, 2023 · $84k · revenue +25%
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.
Provide permanently affordable homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate-income families in the flathead valley and nw montana.
To provide affordable housing and to promote the wise and sustainable use of the earth's resources.
To provide through local leadership economic, technical, and engineering information, and access to resources to improve theeconomies in the area.
The region iii mental health center is a registered non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation dedicated to the establishment, development and maintenance of high quality mental health and chemical dependency care in south central montana.
The Gallatin Watershed Council guides collaborative watershed stewardship in the Gallatin Valley for a healthy and productive landscape.
To identify and provide financing opportunities and technical assistance to emerging and existing businesses, provide community and economic development planning and implementation for the long-term sustainability and growth of the region,…
To promote and develop cooperatives to meet the economic needs and community needs of rural montana.
To create and preserve quality affordable housing options for northern michigan residents through education, development, and partnering with local communities.
Habitat for humanity of missoula is a nonprofit, ecumenical, christian housing ministry dedicated to the elimination of poverty housing in our community and throughout the world.
To assist people and communities to develop the skills, resources, and services necessary to improve their general welfare.
To encourage, stimulate and promote economic development, expansion and diversification in southeastern montana
To build upon the economic base in flathead county by assisting business startups and expansion activities with resources and valuable connections. montana west delivers local business economic development services targeted to impact job…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northwest Montana Human Resources Inc Dba Community Action Parnership Nw Mt and the most unlike its peers is Cascade County Council of the Society of St Vincent De Paul. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
17 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. 17 of the 24 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 HOMEWORD INC ↗
- Who funds HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL OF DISTRICT IX INC ↗
- Who funds DISTRICT 7 HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES INC OF GF ↗
- Who funds RURAL DYNAMICS INC ↗
- Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds NORTHWEST MONTANA HUMAN RESOURCES INC DBA COMMUNITY ACTION PARNERSHIP NW MT ↗
- Who funds HEADWATERS RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT AREA INC ↗
- Who funds DISTRICT XI HUMAN RESOURCE COUNCIL INC ↗
- Who funds BITTER ROOT RESOURCE CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT AREA INC ↗
- Who funds GREAT NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds CASCADE COUNTY COUNCIL OF THE SOCIETY OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL ↗
- Who funds Crosswinds Recovery ↗
- Who funds DISTRICT IV HUMAN RESOURCE DEV COUNCIL ↗
- Who funds SNOWY MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT CORP ↗
- Who funds GRATITUDE IN ACTION FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds MONTANA LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION ↗
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: Montana Healthcare Foundation · Montana Community Foundation Inc · Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · Energy Share of Montana Inc · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Town Pump Charitable Foundation · Wells Fargo Foundation · United Way of Cascade County · Montana Food Bank Network Inc · Headwaters Health Foundation of Western Montana · Otto Bremer Trust · 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 Montana Homeownership Network 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 or a single department — and drag the year to watch it move.
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.