Skip to content

· Community foundation

Seeley Lake Community Foundation

The SEELEY LAKE COMMUNITY FOUNDATION engages in philanthropy, provides leadership, and enhances the quality of life and economic vitality of the seeley lake area.

$220k
Granted FY2025still arriving
15
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$54k
Largest
01What it funds
0196% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Arts & Culture$215kEnvironment$170kPhilanthropy$76kFood & Nutrition$63kRecreation & Sports$62kEducation$55kHuman Services$53kYouth Development$50kOther$0
02FY2025 · 15 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 15 grants below total $174,679, the rows itemized in this filing. The $219,735 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $45,056 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 $10k10 grants · $64k
  • $10k–50k4 grants · $57k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $54k
$7,310
Median grant
1
States reached
$929k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
MONTANA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION$53,604
ALPINE ARTISANS INC$22,270
UPPER SWAN VALLEY HISTORICAL SOCIET$12,706
SWAN VALLEY CONNECTIONS$11,827
SELA SENCI$10,100
CLEARWATER RESOURCE COUNCIL$8,379
SEELEY LAKE ROCKS$8,237
PROTECT THE CLEARWATER$7,310
SEELEY-SWAN COMMUNITY FOOD BANK$6,989
PARENT TEACHER CLUB AT SLE$6,361
SEELEY SWAN HIGH SCHOOL$5,800
BLACKFOOT CHALLENGE$5,789
SEELEY LAKE NORDIC SKI CLUB$5,184
SEELEY LAKE HISTORICAL SOCIETY$5,108
SPARROW'S VINE PREGNANCY RESOURCE$5,015
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 (FY19–25, $47k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 0% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%SPARROW'S VINE: $10k → 9%SPARROW'S VINE: $9k → 9%SPARROW'S VINE: $9k → 9%SPARROW'S VINE: $7k → 9%SPARROW'S VINE PREGNANCY RESOURCE: $5k → 9%MISSOULA AGING SERVICES: $7k → 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.

71%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$516k · 13 repeat orgs$212k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +43% since the first grant, against +15% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2025, 4 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
16

Total granted

$516k
$179k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+43%
+15%

Still filing today

62%
19%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 73% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $33k 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
EnvironmentHealthHuman ServicesAnimalsArts & CultureRecreation & 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

  • AA
    ALPINE ARTISANS INC
    9× · 2017–2025 · $107k · revenue +43%
  • SV
    SWAN VALLEY CONNECTIONS
    7× · 2019–2025 · $68k · revenue +90%
  • US
    UPPER SWAN VALLEY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC
    7× · 2019–2025 · $64k · revenue +31%

Funded once

  • SL
    SEELEY LAKE ELEM SCHOOL
    one grant, 2018 · $50k
  • SL
    SEELEY LAKE SEWER DISTRICT
    one grant, 2017 · $19k
  • WI
    WINDFALL INC
    one grant, 2018 · $14k
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
Scenic Montana Trails
—
2
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
3
Montana Conservation Elders
Environment
4
Madison Valley Ranchlands Group

To help keep ranches in the madison valley viable and promote good stewardship, promote open space, and healthy way of life that has western values and clean water and wildlife habitate and healthy ranchlands.

Environment
5
Montana Trout Unlimited

To conserve, protect and restore montana's coldwater fisheries and watersheds.

Recreation & Sports
6
Grand Teton National Park Foundation

Grand Teton National Park Foundation (the Foundation) is a private, nonprofit organization whose mission is to partner with Grand Teton National Park to steward, protect, and enhance all that is special in the park. Budget limitations,…

Philanthropy
7
Old Trail Museum

To preserve, research, and interpret to the public through its collections, exhibits and programs the physical and cultural heritage of the rocky mountain front region in the state of montana.

Arts & Culture
8
Wild Salmon Rivers

To conserve functioning salmon/steelhead eco-system at watershed levels, integrate angling activities with basic scientific research, collect raw data, monitor environmental functions, salmon/steelhead population dynamics, public…

Environment
9
Scrubgrass Creek Watershed Associat Ion

Watershed and rivers restoration, preservation and protection

Environment
10
Selkirk Conservation Alliance

Regional conservation organization

Unclassified
11
Yaak Valley Forest Council

Working for a wild yaak through science, education, and bold action.

Environment
12
Wood River Land Trust Co

The wood river land trust's mission is to protect and sustain the treasured landscapes and life-giving waters of the wood river valley and to inspire love for this special place for generations to come.

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Seeley Lake Nordic Ski Club; the most unlike its peers is Sparrows Vine. 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, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 13 of the 35 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)
3
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

ALPINE ARTISANS INC: $106,681 · OtherALPINE ARTISANS INCSEELEY LAKE ELEM SCHOOL: $49,946 · OtherSEELEY LAKE ELEM SCHOOLSEELEY LAKE REGIONAL OUTDOOR CENTER FOR KINETIC SPORTS: $34,773 · OtherSEELEY LAKE REGIONAL OUTDOOR CENTER FOR KINETIC SPORTSSEELEY LAKE AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $23,332 · OtherSEELEY LAKE AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCESEELEY LAKE SEWER DISTRICT: $19,000 · OtherWINDFALL INC: $13,794 · OtherIndividual grant recipient: $13,720 · Other+17 more: $130,051 · Other+17 moreSWAN VALLEY CONNECTIONS: $68,256 · EnvironmentSWAN VALLEY CONN…BLACKFOOT CHALLENGE INC: $40,025 · EnvironmentBLACKFOOT CHALLE…CLEARWATER RESOURCE COUNCIL: $8,379 · EnvironmentCLEARWATER RESOU…MONTANA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $76,390 · PhilanthropyMONTANA CO…UPPER SWAN VALLEY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC: $63,879 · Arts & CultureUPPER SWA…SELA SENCI (THINK YOUNG): $44,461 · HealthSEELEY-SWAN MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $9,695 · HealthSPARROWS VINE: $40,190 · Human ServicesMISSOULA AREA AGENCY ON AGING INC: $6,700 · Human ServicesBIG BLACKFOOT CHAPTER OF TROUT UNLIMITED INC: $39,700 · AnimalsSEELEY LAKE NORDIC SKI CLUB: $15,321 · Recreation & Sports
Other$391,297Environment$116,660Philanthropy$76,390Arts & Culture$63,879Health$54,156Human Services$46,890Animals$39,700Recreation & Sports$15,321

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

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetALPINE ARTISANS INC: $106,681 over 9y, 17% of budgetMONTANA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC: $76,390 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetSWAN VALLEY CONNECTIONS: $68,256 over 7y, 1.3% of budgetUPPER SWAN VALLEY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC: $63,879 over 7y, 22% of budgetSELA SENCI (THINK YOUNG): $44,461 over 5y, 12% of budgetSPARROWS VINE: $40,190 over 5y, 7.4% of budgetBLACKFOOT CHALLENGE INC: $40,025 over 5y, 0.9% of budgetBIG BLACKFOOT CHAPTER OF TROUT UNLIMITED INC: $39,700 over 5y, 1.7% of budgetSEELEY LAKE NORDIC SKI CLUB: $15,321 over 2y, 7.0% of budgetMissoula Electric Cooperative Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSEELEY-SWAN MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION: $9,695 over 1y, 63% of budgetCLEARWATER RESOURCE COUNCIL: $8,379 over 1y, 8.6% of budgetMISSOULA AREA AGENCY ON AGING INC: $6,700 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.

  • Who funds ALPINE ARTISANS INC ↗
  • Who funds MONTANA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds SWAN VALLEY CONNECTIONS ↗
  • Who funds UPPER SWAN VALLEY HISTORICAL SOCIETY INC ↗
  • Who funds SELA SENCI (THINK YOUNG) ↗
  • Who funds SPARROWS VINE ↗
  • Who funds BLACKFOOT CHALLENGE INC ↗
  • Who funds BIG BLACKFOOT CHAPTER OF TROUT UNLIMITED INC ↗
  • Who funds SEELEY LAKE NORDIC SKI CLUB ↗
  • Who funds Missoula Electric Cooperative Inc ↗
  • Who funds SEELEY-SWAN MEDICAL CENTER FOUNDATION ↗
  • Who funds CLEARWATER RESOURCE COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds MISSOULA AREA AGENCY ON AGING INC ↗

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.

Gianforte Family Charitable TrustMT13.4× affinity4 shared granteesties to 4 of 4Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Gianforte Family Charitable Trust · Montana Community Foundation Inc · 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 Seeley Lake Community Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Seeley Lake Community Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2025
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%2%6%14%25%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
    1report 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 Seeley Lake Community Foundation?

    Find your warmest path to Seeley Lake Community 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 35 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 Seeley Lake’s filings →

    More from the funding graph