Skip to content
Montana Trout Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Montana Trout 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.

$10k
Granted FY2025still arriving
2
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$5k
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 2024.

Environment$106kEducation$29k
02FY2025 · 2 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$5,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$216k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MONTANA FRESHWATER PARTNERS$5,000
GALLATIN RIVER TASK FORCE$5,000
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 (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 42% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 10%TROUT UNLIMITED: $5k → 9%BIGHORN RIVER ALLIANCE: $5k → 9%UPPER MISSOURI WATERKEEPER: $17k → 10%GALLATIN RIVER TASK FORCE: $5k → 10%MONTANA FRESHWATER PARTNERS: $5k → 10%BIG BLACKFOOT CHAP TROUT UNLIMITED: $3k → 16%BIG HOLE WATERSHED COMMITTEE: $5k → 16%YAAK VALLEY FOREST COUNCIL: $4k → 17%TROUT UNLIMITED: $5k → 9%BIGHORN RIVER ALLIANCE: $5k → 9%UPPER MISSOURI WATERKEEPER: $5k → 10%MADISON CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $5k → 10%BLACKFOOT CHALLENGE: $2k → 16%BIG HOLE WATERSHED COMMITTEE: $4k → 16%TROUT UNLIMITED: $5k → 9%BIGHORN RIVER ALLIANCE: $3k → 9%MADISON CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $3k → 10%BIG HOLE RIVER FOUNDATION: $3k → 16%TROUT UNLIMITED: $2k → 9%BIG HOLE WATERSHED COMMITTEE: $2k → 16%TROUT UNLIMITED: $750 → 9%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.

59%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$85k · 7 repeat orgs$59k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +423% since the first grant, against +42% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2025, 7 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
8

Total granted

$85k
$49k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+423%
+42%

Still filing today

57%
88%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k 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
EnvironmentEducationAnimalsRecreation & 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

  • UM
    Upper Missouri Waterkeeper Inc
    2× · 2020–2023 · $22k · revenue +423%
  • BR
    BIGHORN RIVER ALLIANCE
    3× · 2020–2022 · $13k · revenue +90%
  • BH
    BIG HOLE WATERSHED COMMITTEE INC
    3× · 2018–2022 · $10k · revenue +28%

Funded once

  • MS
    Montana State University Foundation Incgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $27k · revenue +315%
  • PP
    PRICKLY PEAR LAND TRUSTgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $5k · revenue +668%
  • MT
    MONTANA TROUT UNLIMITEDgraduated
    one grant, 2024 · $5k · revenue +42%
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
Bitterroot Water Partnership

BWP leads reliable and intentional conservation initiatives that promote and provide clean, ample water for people and habitats by working with key partners and our communities

Environment
2
Gallatin Wildlife Association

Promote research and actions to save wildlife.

Animals
3
Henrys Fork Foundation Inc

The henry's fork foundation is the only organization who's sole purpose is to conserve, protect and restore the unique fisheries, wildlife and aesthetic qualities of the henry's fork and it's watershed. specifically, hff works diligently…

—
4
Lower Clark Fork Watershed Group

The mission of the Lower Clark Fork Watershed Group (LCFWG) is to facilitate collaboration among watershed stakeholders and to coordinate efforts to maintain, enhance, and restore the ecological integrity of tributaries to the lower Clark…

Environment
5
Save our Gallatin Front Inc
Environment
6
Idaho Wildlife Federation

The Idaho Wildlife Federation (IWF) promotes the conservation of Idaho's wildlife heritage and legacy of sporting opportunities for the current and future generations.

Animals
7
Trout Unlimited

To conserve, protect and restore North America's coldwater fisheries and their watersheds.

—
8
Upper Colorado River Alliance
Environment
9
Watershed Restoration Coalition for the

The organization is dedicated to restoring water quality, fisheries, and wildlife, and protecting the agricultural heritage and open space of the upper clark fork river basin of southwest montana. the organization pursues these goals by…

Environment
10
Blackstone River Coalition

Improve water quality blackstone wtrshd

Environment
11
Public Land Water Access Association

The organization's mission is to maintain, restore, and perpetuate public access to the boundaries of all Montana's public lands and waters.

—
12
Idaho Forest Restoration Partnership
Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Montana Trout Unlimited; the most unlike its peers is Gallatin Watershed Council Inc. 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

13 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. 13 of the 17 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)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
13/13
Grantees still filing
10/13
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Montana State University Foundation Inc: $27,000 · EducationMontana State University Foundation In…Upper Missouri Waterkeeper Inc: $22,000 · EducationUpper Missouri Waterkeeper IncBIGHORN RIVER ALLIANCE: $13,000 · EnvironmentBIGHORN RIVER ALLIANCEBIG HOLE WATERSHED COMMITTEE INC: $10,000 · EnvironmentBIG HOLE WATERSHED COMMITTEE INCPRICKLY PEAR LAND TRUST: $5,000 · EnvironmentPRICKLY PEAR LAND TRUSTGallatin Watershed Council Inc: $5,000 · EnvironmentGallatin Watershed Council IncMONTANA FRESHWATER PARTNERS INC: $5,000 · EnvironmentMONTANA FRESHWATER PARTNERS INCGallatin River Task Force: $5,000 · EnvironmentGallatin River Task ForceYAAK VALLEY FOREST COUNCIL: $3,500 · EnvironmentYAAK VALLEY FOREST COUNCIL+1 more: $1,500 · EnvironmentTROUT UNLIMITED: $17,500 · OtherTROUT UNLIMITEDIndividual grant recipient: $10,000 · OtherIndividual grant recipientMADISON CONSERVATION DISTRICT: $7,500 · OtherMADISON CONSERVATION DISTRICTBig Hole River Foundation Inc: $2,500 · OtherBig Hole River Foundation IncIndividual grant recipient: $1,800 · OtherMONTANA TROUT UNLIMITED: $5,000 · Recreation & SportsBIG BLACKFOOT CHAPTER OF TROUT UNLIMITED INC: $3,000 · Animals
Education$49,000Environment$48,000Other$39,300Recreation & Sports$5,000Animals$3,000

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMontana State University Foundation Inc: $27,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUpper Missouri Waterkeeper Inc: $22,000 over 2y, 2.6% of budgetBIGHORN RIVER ALLIANCE: $13,000 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetBIG HOLE WATERSHED COMMITTEE INC: $10,000 over 3y, 0.9% of budgetPRICKLY PEAR LAND TRUST: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGallatin Watershed Council Inc: $5,000 over 2y, 0.7% of budgetMONTANA FRESHWATER PARTNERS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMONTANA TROUT UNLIMITED: $5,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetGallatin River Task Force: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetYAAK VALLEY FOREST COUNCIL: $3,500 over 1y, 1.1% of budgetBIG BLACKFOOT CHAPTER OF TROUT UNLIMITED INC: $3,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBig Hole River Foundation Inc: $2,500 over 1y, 1.9% of budgetBLACKFOOT CHALLENGE INC: $1,500 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.

PatagoniaorgMontana Watershed Coo…National Fish and Wil…The High Stakes Found…Perkins Charitable Fo…Network for GoodDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
PatagoniaorgCA21.4× affinity8 shared granteesties to 8 of 8Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Patagoniaorg · Montana Watershed Coordination Council Inc · National Fish and Wildlife Foundation · The High Stakes Foundation · Perkins Charitable Foundation · Network for Good · 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 Montana Trout Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Montana Trout 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%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    3report 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 Trout Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Montana Trout 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 17 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 Montana Trout’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