Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

Montana Wilderness Association

Uniting and mobilizing communities to keep montana wild.

$20k
Granted FY2025still arriving
1
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$9k
Largest
01What you fund
01100% classified

What you funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY20172025.

Environment$284kCivil Rights$28kRecreation & Sports$5kHealth$5k
02FY2025 · 1 grant

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 1 grants below total $9,000 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $19,788 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $10,788 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

$9,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BACKCOUNTRY HUNTERS AND ANGLERS$9,000
02The need
03

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.

show:

Dollar for dollar, your grants (FY17–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of your dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%THE KENDEDA FUND: $5k → 10%FRIENDS OF SCOTCHMAN PEAKS WILDERNESS: $16k → 12%BACKCOUNTRY HUNTERS AND ANGLERS: $9k → 9%THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $21k → 10%RUBY VALLEY STRATEGIC ALLIANCE: $11k → 10%GLACIER TWO MEDICINE ALLIANCE: $18k → 26%FRIENDS OF SCOTCHMAN PEAKS: $9k → 12%THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $18k → 10%GLACIER TWO MEDICINE ALLIANCE: $18k → 26%FRIENDS OF SCOTCHMAN PEAKS: $8k → 12%THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY: $10k → 10%GLACIER TWO MEDICINE ALLIANCE: $10k → 26%FRIENDS OF SCOTCHMAN PEAKS: $7k → 12%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

66%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$214k · 5 repeat orgs$108k to everyone else

5 repeat relationships — 0 still active in FY2025, 5 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
8

Total granted

$214k
$99k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+23%
+55%

Still filing today

100%
75%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k went to new ones.

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

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’25
EnvironmentAnimalsCivil RightsOther

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

  • TG
    THE GLACIER-TWO MEDICINE ALLIANCE
    3× · 2018–2020 · $46k · revenue +240%
  • NATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION
    3× · 2018–2020 · $46k · revenue +23%
  • FO
    FRIENDS OF SCOTCHMAN PEAKS WILDERNESS INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $40k · revenue +1%

Funded once

  • US
    UPPER SEVEN LAWgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $28k · revenue +63%
  • MW
    MONTANA WILDLIFE FEDERATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2017 · $22k · revenue +52%
  • HE
    HEADWATERS ECONOMICS INCgraduated
    one grant, 2023 · $17k · revenue +55%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Montana Wilderness Association

Uniting and mobilizing communities to keep montana wild.

Environment
2
Wyoming Wildlife Advocates

To promote science-based wildlife management that fosters ecosystem health and dynamic equilibrium between species throughout the state of wyoming.

Animals
3
Montana Hunters and Anglers Action

Montana hunters and anglers action is an organization dedicated to protecting wildlife, wildlife habitat and access to public lands for hunting and fishing.

4
Scenic Montana Trails
5
Gallatin Wildlife Association

Promote research and actions to save wildlife.

Animals
6
Wyoming Wildlife Federation

Wyoming wildlife federation delivers leadership in conservation for the state's wildlife, hunters, anglers, and conservationists through policy, education, advocacy, and habitat.

Animals
7
Montana Conservation Elders
Environment
8
Wyoming Wilderness Association

The wyoming wilderness association works to protect wyoming's public wild lands to ensure a future of wild places for people and wildlife.

Animals
9
Wilderness Conservation Foundation
Environment
10
Trustees for Alaska

Founded in 1974, trustees for alaska serves the public interest by providing legal counsel to protect and defend alaska's lands, waters, wildlife, and people.

Environment
11
Cascadia Wildlands

Cascadia wildlands defends and restores cacasia's wild ecosystems in the forests,in the courts, and in the streets. we envision vast old-growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, a stable climate, and…

Environment
12
Native Ecosystems Council

Promote wildlife habitat

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Montana Wildlife Federation and the most unlike its peers is The Kendeda Fund. 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

12 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 20172025, not grant rows in a single year — so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 12 of the 14 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
6
Early backer (in before they grew)
12/12
Grantees still filing
9/12
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

THE WILDERNESS SOCIETY — $48,626 · EnvironmentTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETYTHE GLACIER-TWO MEDICINE ALLIANCE — $45,626 · EnvironmentTHE GLACIER-TWO MEDICINE ALLIANCENATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION — $45,626 · EnvironmentNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATIONFRIENDS OF SCOTCHMAN PEAKS WILDERNESS INC — $40,000 · EnvironmentFRIENDS OF SCOTCHMAN PEAKS WILDERNESS INCWILD MONTANA ACTION FUND — $33,900 · EnvironmentWILD MONTANA ACTION FUNDHEADWATERS ECONOMICS INC — $16,500 · EnvironmentHEADWATERS ECONOMICS INCBACKCOUNTRY HUNTERS & ANGLERS — $9,000 · Environment+1 more — $7,000 · EnvironmentUPPER SEVEN LAW — $28,000 · Civil RightsUPPER SEV…RUBY VALLEY CONSERVATION DISTRICT — $11,300 · OtherRUBY VALL…The Kendeda Fund — $5,000 · OtherThe Kende…MONTANA AMBASSADORS INC — $5,000 · OtherMONTANA A…DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES — $5,000 · OtherDEPARTMEN…MONTANA WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $21,522 · Animals
Environment$246,278Civil Rights$28,000Other$26,300Animals$21,522

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetTHE WILDERNESS SOCIETY — $48,626 over 3y, 0.1% of budgetTHE GLACIER-TWO MEDICINE ALLIANCE — $45,626 over 3y, 14% of budgetNATIONAL PARKS CONSERVATION ASSOCIATION — $45,626 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetFRIENDS OF SCOTCHMAN PEAKS WILDERNESS INC — $40,000 over 4y, 6.7% of budgetWILD MONTANA ACTION FUND — $33,900 over 3y, 16% of budgetUPPER SEVEN LAW — $28,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetMONTANA WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $21,522 over 1y, 4.8% of budgetHEADWATERS ECONOMICS INC — $16,500 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetThe Kendeda Fund — $5,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budget
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.

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.

The Kendeda FundDE17.8× affinity6 shared granteesties to 9 of 9Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: The Kendeda Fund · Patagoniaorg · Wilburforce Foundation · Maki Foundation · Western Conservation Action · The High Stakes Foundation · Western Conservation Foundation · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · 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 Wilderness Association 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.

2024
202122232425
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%your 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, FY2025

    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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 14 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph