Skip to content
Montana Wilderness Association at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· 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 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.

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

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 1 grants below total $9,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $19,788 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $10,788 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.
$9,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$5.7M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BACKCOUNTRY HUNTERS AND ANGLERS$9,000
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 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its 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
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.

66%of every dollar goes to organizations it has 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%
+52%

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
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

  • 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 INC
    one grant, 2023 · $17k · revenue -1%
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
Wyoming Wildlife Advocates

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

Animals
2
Montana Wilderness Association

Uniting and mobilizing communities to keep montana wild.

Environment
3
Scenic Montana Trails
—
4
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
5
Gallatin Wildlife Association

Promote research and actions to save wildlife.

Animals
6
Montana Conservation Elders
Environment
7
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.

—
8
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
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
Native Ecosystems Council

Promote wildlife habitat

Environment
12
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.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is The Wilderness Society; 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 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. 12 of the 14 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)
12/12
Grantees still filing
8/12
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and 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 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 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
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.

The Kendeda FundPatagoniaorgWilburforce FoundationMaki FoundationWestern Conservation …The High Stakes Found…Western Conservation …Donor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
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

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 Wilderness Association funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Montana Wilderness Association. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%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.

    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 14 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 Wilderness Association’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