Skip to content
Montana Justice Foundation at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Montana Justice Foundation

To achieve equal access to justice for all montanans through effective funding and leadership.

$843k
Granted FY2025still arriving
14
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$616k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
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.

Crime & Legal$4.9MEducation$81kEmployment$65kHuman Services$39kHousing & Shelter$15kCivil Rights$10k
02FY2025 · 14 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 14 grants below total $778,850, the rows itemized in this filing. The $843,100 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $64,250 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k6 grants · $43k
  • $10k–50k7 grants · $120k
  • $250k+1 grant · $616k
$12,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$6.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MONTANA LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION$616,150
PARTNERS FOR JUSTICE$30,000
HAVEN$25,000
MONTANA FAIR HOUSING$15,000
YWCA BILLINGS$15,000
BILLINGS MEDIATION CENTER INC$13,000
EASTERN MONTANA CASA GAL INC$12,000
MONTANA INNOCENCE PROJECT$10,000
SAFE HARBOR INC$7,500
CASA OF MISSOULA$7,500
SANDERS COUNTY COALITION FOR FAMILIES$7,500
CASA OF YELLOWSTONE COUNTY$7,000
CENTER FOR RESTORATIVE YOUTH JUSTICE$7,000
CASA OF LAKE & SANDERS COUNTIES$6,200
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:

Its human-services grants (FY18–25, $130k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 14%. 59% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 14%CENTER FOR RESTORATIVE YOUTH JUSTICE: $7k → 11%SANDERS COUNTY COALITION FOR FAMILIES: $8k → 17%SAFE HARBOR INC: $8k → 18%SANDERS COUNTY COALITION FOR FAMILIES: $6k → 17%SAFE HARBOR INC: $8k → 18%YWCA BILLINGS: $10k → 9%CASA OF LAKE & SANDERS COUNTIES: $6k → 18%YWCA BILLINGS: $8k → 9%SAFE HARBOUR INC: $8k → 18%YWCA BILLINGS: $8k → 9%CASA OF LAKE & SANDERS COUNTIES: $6k → 18%YWCA BILLINGS: $6k → 9%SAFE HARBOR: $5k → 18%YWCA BILLINGS: $5k → 9%CASA OF LAKE & SANDERS COUNTIES: $5k → 18%YWCA BILLINGS: $5k → 9%SAFE HARBOR: $5k → 18%FAMILY SERVICE: $5k → 9%CASA OF LAKE & SANDERS COUNTIES: $5k → 18%SAFE HARBOUR INC: $5k → 18%CASA OF LAKE & SANDERS COUNTIES: $5k → 18%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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.0M · 20 repeat orgs$163k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +27% since the first grant, against -16% for those funded once.

20 repeat relationships: 10 still active in FY2025, 10 since wound down; 4 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

20
4

Total granted

$5.0M
$94k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+27%
-16%

Still filing today

80%
50%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 91% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $69k 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
Human ServicesCrime & LegalCivil RightsHousing & ShelterCommunity ImprovementEducationOther
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

  • ML
    MONTANA LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION
    9× · 2017–2025 · $4.0M · revenue +244%
  • TM
    TRUST MONTANA INC
    5× · 2019–2023 · $347k · revenue +68% · 48% of their budget
  • EM
    EASTERN MONTANA CASAGAL INC
    8× · 2017–2025 · $82k · revenue +97%

Funded once

  • DO
    DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
    one grant, 2024 · $65k
  • MG
    MONTANA GENERATIONAL JUSTICE
    one grant, 2019 · $16k · revenue -78%
  • CO
    CASA OF HILL COUNTY INC
    one grant, 2024 · $8k
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

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
Casa of Natrona County

To provide the court with objective information regarding the status of children involved in abuse or neglect cases. Duties of the appointed advocate would include gathering information, developing recommendations, and providing written…

Human Services
2
Montana Casagal Association

The montana casa/gal association supports and promotes local casa/gal programs in providing court appointed volunteer advocacy so every abused or neglected child in montana can be safe, have a permanent home and the opportunity to thrive.

Human Services
3
Jackson County Casa

Casa is a unique non-profit helping abused and neglected children in the jackson county family court system. our team of trained volunteers,staff case supervisors, and staff attorneys allow each child to be represented in a court of law…

Civil Rights
4
Casa of South Central Kentucky Inc

Volunteers in action seeking safety and permanency for our community's youngest victims. casa provides support, advocacy, and intervention for abused, neglected, and dependent children in south central ky's family court system.

Crime & Legal
5
Mineral County Casa Program

Court appointed special advocate

Crime & Legal
6
Casa Childrens Intervention Services Inc

Provide a voice in a court for abused and neglected children through volunteer court and appointed advocates.

Civil Rights
7
Morgan County Child Advocacy Center

To provide a safe caring place to evaluate any child who may have been abused

Crime & Legal
8
Legal Aid of Wyoming Inc

Legal aid of wyoming is a statewide non-profit organization providing high quality civil legal services to eligible people to facilitate and encourage a just legal system.

Crime & Legal
9
Montana Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence

To support and facilitate networking among member organizations while advocating for social system changes to eliminate sexual and domestic violence in montana. the goals are accomplished through advocacy, education, public policy, and…

—
10
Casa of Clackamas County

Casa of clackamas county recruits, trains, and supports court appointed special advocates: community volunteers who advocate for the best interest of children in the foster care system who need safe, permanent homes.

Crime & Legal
11
Casa Lake County Inc

Casa lake county is a nonprofit membership organization that advocates for the best interest of abused and neglected children within the juvenile court system.

Civil Rights
12
Empower Mt

Empowermt creates a more just and inclusive society by developing youth and adult leaders who work to end mistreatment, correct systemic inequities, and strengthen communities. empowermt envisions a montana where each person is respected…

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yellowstone Casa Inc; the most unlike its peers is Montana Generational Justice. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

22 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 22 of the 28 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
9
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/22
Grantees still filing
16/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

MONTANA LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION: $4,020,689 · OtherMONTANA LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION+11 more: $252,414 · Other+11 moreTRUST MONTANA INC: $347,332 · Community ImprovementBILLINGS FAMILY YMCA INC: $40,625 · Human ServicesSAFE HARBOR INC: $37,500 · Human ServicesCASA OF LAKE & SANDERS COUNTIES: $26,700 · Human ServicesCASA FOR KIDS INC: $18,000 · Human ServicesSanders Co Coalition For Families: $13,000 · Human ServicesCENTER FOR RESTORATIVE YOUTH JUSTICE: $7,000 · Human ServicesFAMILY SERVICE: $5,000 · Human ServicesYELLOWSTONE CASA INC: $47,000 · Crime & LegalPARTNERS FOR JUSTICE INC: $30,000 · Crime & LegalMONTANA INNOCENCE PROJECT: $18,000 · Crime & LegalMONTANA GENERATIONAL JUSTICE: $16,300 · Crime & LegalCASCADE COUNTY LAW CLINIC: $13,000 · Crime & LegalEASTERN MONTANA CASAGAL INC: $81,750 · Civil RightsTHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATION: $81,250 · EducationMONTANA FAIR HOUSING INC: $70,499 · Housing & Shelter
Other$4,273,103Community Improvement$347,332Human Services$147,825Crime & Legal$124,300Civil Rights$81,750Education$81,250Housing & Shelter$70,499

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 budgetMONTANA LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION: $4,020,689 over 9y, 17% of budgetTRUST MONTANA INC: $347,332 over 5y, 48% of budgetEASTERN MONTANA CASAGAL INC: $81,750 over 8y, 4.8% of budgetTHE UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA FOUNDATION: $81,250 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetMONTANA FAIR HOUSING INC: $70,499 over 9y, 2.9% of budgetYELLOWSTONE CASA INC: $47,000 over 7y, 1.1% of budgetBILLINGS FAMILY YMCA INC: $40,625 over 6y, 0.2% of budgetSAFE HARBOR INC: $37,500 over 6y, 0.7% of budgetCASA OF LAKE & SANDERS COUNTIES: $26,700 over 5y, 3.2% of budgetYOUNG WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF BILLINGS MONTANA: $25,000 over 2y, 0.6% of budgetHAVEN: $25,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetCASA OF CASCADE COUNTY: $24,000 over 4y, 3.0% of budgetMONTANA INNOCENCE PROJECT: $18,000 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetCASA FOR KIDS INC: $18,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetCOMMUNITY MEDIATION CENTER: $17,500 over 3y, 16% of budgetCOURT APPOINTED SPECIAL ADVOCATES OF MISSOULA: $15,000 over 2y, 1.4% of budgetCASCADE COUNTY LAW CLINIC: $13,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetSanders Co Coalition For Families: $13,000 over 2y, 0.8% of budgetFAMILY SERVICE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.1% 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.

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.

Otto Bremer TrustSample Foundation IncFirst Interstate Banc…Montana Community Fou…Dennis & Phyllis Wash…Montana Casagal Assoc…The Steele-Reese Foun…Montana Healthcare Fo…Headwaters Health Fou…United Way of Yellows…Billings Community Fo…The Angora Ridge Foun…
Otto Bremer TrustMN27.8× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Otto Bremer Trust · Sample Foundation Inc · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Montana Community Foundation Inc · Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · Montana Casagal Association · The Steele-Reese Foundation Xxxxx1004 · Montana Healthcare Foundation · Headwaters Health Foundation of Western Montana · United Way of Yellowstone County Inc · Billings Community Foundation · The Angora Ridge 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 Justice Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Montana Justice Foundation. 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    10report 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.

    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 28 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 Justice’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