· Private foundation
Mta Foundation Inc
Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.
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
- Under $10k88 grants · $170k
- $10k–50k6 grants · $83k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA ANCHORAGE ENGINEERING | $25,000 |
| WASILLA WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT INITIATIVE | $15,000 |
| WASILLA HIGH SCHOOL | $12,671 |
| ALASKA BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ALLIANCE | $10,462 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $10,000 |
| MUSEUM OF ALASKA TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRY | $9,800 |
| Individual grant recipient | $8,500 |
| VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS | $8,000 |
| REACH 907 | $6,029 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| Individual grant recipient | $5,000 |
| MAT SU SKI CLUB | $5,000 |
| ALASKA BUSINESS WEEK | $5,000 |
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 (FY18–25, $44k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 2% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.
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.
Which US states your grants reach
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 +10% for the ones you funded once.
99 repeat relationships — 35 still active in FY2025, 64 since wound down; 59 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, 48% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $131k 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
- HAHATCHER ALPINE XPERIENCE3× · 2021–2023 · $84k · revenue +215%
- WAWasilla Area Seniors Inc7× · 2018–2025 · $32k · revenue +42%
- R9REACH 9077× · 2019–2025 · $25k · revenue +542%
Funded once
- PSPALMER SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER INCone grant, 2022 · $30k · revenue -13%
- M(ME-2-WE (GRIZZLY FAMILY FITNESS)one grant, 2024 · $28k
- MHMY HOUSE & NINESTARone grant, 2023 · $25k
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.
Challenge Alaska improves the lives of people with disabilities, their families, and the community through adaptive sports, therapeutic recreation, and education.
Building partnerships, building trails. Working to build trails across the state and build capacity for trail organizations.
To provide access, facilities, recreation, and educational opportunities within the alpine environment of Chugach State Park.
To provide comprehensive mental health and primary care services in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. The Organization operates mental health-related clinics and a Primary Health Care Clinic.
To advance solutions that build the resilience and sustainability of Alaska, for its current and future residents and the natural systems upon which they depend.
To finding and doing basic medical to people lost or have perished in the wilderness. Our goal is to bring people home safely!
National amateur sports (softball) competition
AK Wins promotes responsible economic development, fiscal policy and general prosperity by educating, engaging and empowering Alaskans on important public policy issues.
Youth & adult hockey leagues, tournaments & camps promote youth hockey, develop and encourage sportmanship between all players for the betterment of the individuals physical & social well being.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is United Way of Matanuska-Susitna Borough and the most unlike its peers is Christmas Friendship Dinner Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
For each theme you fund, this compares how the sector’s money is shifting with how your own giving is shifting.
Sector change and giving change are each shown relative to their own range, growing (right) or shrinking (left); both normalized, so inflation isn’t mistaken for growth.
Your grantees are a median of 22 years old; the field is 18. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 23% startups (under 5 years old) — 10% of your grantees by number, and just 5% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 14% of the field you don’t fund.
Age = years since IRS exemption (a founding proxy). “Closed” = auto-revocation for 3 years of non-filing — a floor on closure, not proof, and bigger established orgs lapse least. Association, not causation.
79 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. 79 of the 394 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
Showing your 200 largest grantees by grant value.
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 HATCHER ALPINE XPERIENCE ↗
- Who funds UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Wasilla Area Seniors Inc ↗
- Who funds ALASKA BUSINESS WEEK ↗
- Who funds PALMER SENIOR CITIZENS CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds REACH 907 ↗
- Who funds UNITED WAY OF MATANUSKA-SUSITNA BOROUGH ↗
- Who funds MAT-SU YOUTH HOUSING ↗
- Who funds CHRISTMAS FRIENDSHIP DINNER INC ↗
- Who funds Palmer Museum of History and Art ↗
- Who funds Alaska Pacific University ↗
- Who funds DENALI EDUCATION CENTER ↗
- Who funds UPPER SUSITNA FOOD PANTRY ↗
- Who funds VALLEY PERFORMING ARTS ↗
- Who funds THE CHILDREN'S PLACE ↗
- Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF ALASKA ↗
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: Valley Hospital Association Inc Dba Mat-Su Health Foundation · Rasmuson Foundation · The Alaska Community Foundation · Matanuska Electric Association Charitable Foundation · United Way of Matanuska-Susitna Borough · Richard L and Diane M Block Foundation · The Carr Foundation Inc · Mat-Su Trails & Parks Foundation · Brad Sethness Foundation · Alaska Children's Trust · M J Murdock Charitable Trust · Global Credit Union 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 Mta Foundation 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.
Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus
How do I get to Mta Foundation Inc?
Find your warmest path to Mta Foundation Inc 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.