Skip to content
Partnership With Native Americans at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Partnership With Native Americans

Serving immediate needs, supporting long-term solutions for strong, self-sufficient native american communities.

$8.6M
Granted FY2025still arriving
6
Grants FY2025still arriving
6
States reached
$10k
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 2024.

Animals$383kEducation$141kCommunity Improvement$65kEnvironment$50kFood & Nutrition$30kYouth Development$20kEmployment$18kPhilanthropy$15kOther$0
02FY2025 · 6 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 6 grants below total $57,200, the rows itemized in this filing. The $8,604,533 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $8,547,333 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 $10k1 grant · $7k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $50k
$10,000
Median grant
6
States reached
$38M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
12 HILLS DOG RESCUE$10,000
BRO AND TRACY ANIMAL WELFARE$10,000
FRECKLES AND TOMCAT RESCUE$10,000
LAKE TRAVERSE ANIMAL RESCUE$10,000
TAILS OF LOVE RESCUE$10,000
UNDERDOG ANIMAL RESCUE AND REHAB$7,200
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 (FY20–20, $25k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%PASCUA YAQUI TRIBE CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION: $25k → 15%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.

Which US states its grants reach

MT
ND
MN
SD
UT
CO
NE
AZ
NM
OK
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.
$469k · 13 repeat orgs$320k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +75% since the first grant, against +31% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 4 still active in FY2025, 9 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
23

Total granted

$469k
$303k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+75%
+31%

Still filing today

77%
43%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 70% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $17k 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
AnimalsEducationHealthHuman ServicesYouth DevelopmentPhilanthropyOther
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

  • 1H
    12 HILLS DOG RESCUE
    9× · 2017–2025 · $80k · revenue +116%
  • LT
    LAKE TRAVERSE ANIMAL REZCUE
    6× · 2020–2025 · $58k · revenue +489% · 36% of their budget
  • DF
    DOUGHERTY FOUNDATION INC
    4× · 2019–2022 · $53k · revenue ×13

Funded once

  • ND
    NALWOODI DENZHONE STRENGTH AND BEAUTY COMMUNITYgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $40k · revenue +31%
  • PY
    PASCUA YAQUI TRIBE CHARITABLE ORGANIZATIONgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $25k · revenue +139%
  • CR
    CHEYENNE RIVER YOUTH PROJECT INCgraduated
    one grant, 2020 · $20k · revenue +179%
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
Spay & Neuter Action Program

To reduce the population of unwanted animals in the las cruces area.

Animals
2
Blackhat Humane Society

Rescue and adopt out abandoned animals on navajo reservation

Animals
3
Desert Paws

Please refer to schedule O

Animals
4
Wolfe Ranch Rescue
Animals
5
Desert Dog Rescue Inc

Animal rescue

Animals
6
Yaqui Animal Rescue

Yaqui provides shelter and care for unwanted animals. Adoptable animals are listed on Petfinder and taken to adoption events primarily in the Valley. A number of Yaquis animals are unadoptable due to the care needed and Yaqui becomes a…

Animals
7
A Paw Up Rescue

Dog rescue

Animals
8
Pom and the Hound Animal Refuge

Animal Welfare

—
9
Twiggs County Animal Rescue

Save animals in a county with no animal services

Animals
10
Big Luck Club

Intake stray/sickly dogs from Navajo reservation, get them healthy, altered, vaccinated, manners, obedience, self-confidence, and find them great homes.

Animals
11
Pet Los Cabos

Pet Los Cabos procides sterilization for dogs and cats. They provided 3000 spay and neuters in 2024 and rehomed 180 dogs and cats through an adoption program.

Animals
12
Yavapai Humane Trappers Animal Search

Animal search and rescue, vetting, rehome and placement of unwanted and abandoned pets, primarily in northern arizona.sponsors a foster pet program and overpopulation program of spay and neuter.

Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Oglala Pet Project Goodman; the most unlike its peers is Dougherty Foundation 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

22 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. 22 of the 38 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)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
21/22
Grantees still filing
18/22
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

12 HILLS DOG RESCUE: $79,650 · Animals12 HILLS DOG RESCUELAKE TRAVERSE ANIMAL REZCUE: $57,500 · AnimalsLAKE TRAVERSE ANIMAL REZCUEBRO AND TRACY ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $50,000 · AnimalsBRO AND TRACY ANIMAL WELFARE INCWOLF POINT POUND PUPPIES ANIMAL RESCUE: $41,703 · AnimalsWOLF POINT POUND PUPPIES ANIMAL RESCUETUBA CITY HUMANE SOCIETY INCORPORATED: $30,000 · AnimalsTUBA CITY HUMANE SOCIETY INCORPORATEDTAILS OF LOVE RESCUE: $28,000 · AnimalsTAILS OF LOVE RESCUEMCKINLEY COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY: $27,500 · AnimalsMCKINLEY COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETYHUMANE SOCIETY LAKE COUNTY AREA INC: $21,000 · AnimalsHUMANE SOCIETY LAKE COUNTY AREA INCOGLALA PET PROJECT GOODMAN: $13,000 · Animals+2 more: $13,200 · AnimalsGOOD DOG REZ-Q: $20,000 · OtherGOOD DOG REZ-QCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY: $20,000 · OtherCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITYARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY: $18,000 · OtherARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITYCONTINENTAL DIVIDE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $15,050 · OtherCONTINENTAL DIVIDE ELECTRIC …CHEYENNE RIVER GAS COMPANY: $10,580 · OtherCHEYENNE RIVER GAS COMPANYD & R PROPANE INC: $10,465 · OtherNORTHEASTERN STATE: $10,000 · OtherSTRATA TECH EDUCATION GROUP: $10,000 · OtherFRECKLES AND TOMCAT RESCUE: $10,000 · OtherROSEBUD SIOUX TRIBE ANIMAL CLINIC: $10,000 · OtherSOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY: $10,000 · OtherREZ-SOLUTIONS AND ANIMAL SHELTER INC: $9,264 · OtherUNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO - HEALTH SCIENCE CENTER: $9,000 · OtherMontana State University: $9,000 · OtherMOREAU GRAND ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE: $8,050 · Other+3 more: $17,600 · Other+3 moreDOUGHERTY FOUNDATION INC: $53,250 · EducationDOUGHERTY FOUNDATI…Midwestern University: $29,125 · EducationMidwestern Univers…COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $20,000 · EducationCOLORADO STATE UNI…ARIZONA COUNCIL ON ECONOMIC EDUCAT: $18,000 · EducationARIZONA COUNCIL ON…THE FORT LEWIS COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $9,500 · EducationTHE FORT LEWIS COL…NALWOODI DENZHONE STRENGTH AND BEAUTY COMMUNITY: $40,000 · HealthPASCUA YAQUI TRIBE CHARITABLE ORGANIZATION: $25,000 · Human ServicesCHEYENNE RIVER YOUTH PROJECT INC: $20,000 · Youth DevelopmentOYATE TECA PROJECT INC: $15,000 · Philanthropy
Animals$361,553Other$197,009Education$129,875Health$40,000Human Services$25,000Youth Development$20,000Philanthropy$15,000

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budget12 HILLS DOG RESCUE: $79,650 over 9y, 20% of budgetLAKE TRAVERSE ANIMAL REZCUE: $57,500 over 6y, 36% of budgetDOUGHERTY FOUNDATION INC: $53,250 over 4y, 17% of budgetBRO AND TRACY ANIMAL WELFARE INC: $50,000 over 5y, 4.7% of budgetWOLF POINT POUND PUPPIES ANIMAL RESCUE: $41,703 over 5y, 9.2% of budgetNALWOODI DENZHONE STRENGTH AND BEAUTY COMMUNITY: $40,000 over 1y, 7.7% of budgetTUBA CITY HUMANE SOCIETY INCORPORATED: $30,000 over 4y, 4.3% of budgetMidwestern University: $29,125 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetMCKINLEY COUNTY HUMANE SOCIETY: $27,500 over 3y, 2.0% of budgetHUMANE SOCIETY LAKE COUNTY AREA INC: $21,000 over 2y, 2.8% of budgetCHEYENNE RIVER YOUTH PROJECT INC: $20,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION: $20,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetARIZONA COUNCIL ON ECONOMIC EDUCAT: $18,000 over 1y, 2.6% of budgetCONTINENTAL DIVIDE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $15,050 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetOYATE TECA PROJECT INC: $15,000 over 1y, 8.2% of budgetOGLALA PET PROJECT GOODMAN: $13,000 over 2y, 11% of budgetTHE FORT LEWIS COLLEGE FOUNDATION: $9,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMOREAU GRAND ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE: $8,050 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetUNDERDOG ANIMAL RESCUE AND REHAB: $7,200 over 1y, 0.4% of budget4 LUV OF DOG RESCUE: $6,000 over 1y, 1.0% 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.

Best Friends Animal S…Humane World for Anim…The Duffield Family F…Arizona Community Fou…Community Foundation …Paypal Charitable Giv…Gs Donor Advised Phil…Charities Aid Foundat…Network for GoodVanguard Charitable E…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…
Best Friends Animal SocietyUT14.9× affinity5 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Best Friends Animal Society · Humane World for Animals Inc · The Duffield Family Foundation Dba Maddie's Fund · Arizona Community Foundation · Community Foundation for Southern Arizona · Paypal Charitable Giving Fund · Gs Donor Advised Philanthropy Fund for Wealth Management Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Network for Good · Vanguard Charitable Endowment Program · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Partnership With Native Americans funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Partnership With Native Americans. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%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 38 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 Partnership With Native Americans’ 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