Skip to content
Plinth

· Public charity

St James Healthcare

We reveal and foster god's healing love by improving the health of the people and communities we serve, especially those who are poor and vulnerable.

$4.2M
Granted FY2024still arriving
4
Grants FY2024still arriving
2
States reached
$3.7M
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 FY20172024.

Health$23MFood & Nutrition$76kCommunity Improvement$14k
02FY2024 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $25k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $51k
  • $250k+2 grants · $4.1M
$397,376
Median grant
2
States reached
$137M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
SISTERS OF CHARITY OF LEAVENWORTH HEALTH SYSTEM INC$3,714,190
ST JAMES HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION$397,376
BUTTE EMERGENCY FOOD BANK$50,500
HELP CENTER INC$25,000
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:

Your human-services grants (FY19–24, $35k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 6%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 6%HELP CENTER INC: $25k → 10%ACTION INC: $10k → 16%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.

04

Where the work is directed

The same grants, placed two ways — where each recipient sits, and where its stated purpose earmarks the money.

About 12% of St James Healthcare’s grant dollars are earmarked, by their stated purpose, for a different county than the recipient’s own address — money that lands at a nonprofit in one place but is meant to do its work in another. Read by recipient address, 16% of the giving stays in MT; read by stated purpose it is 89% — more of the work is directed home than the recipients' locations suggest.

St James Healthcarelessmore of its giving
Placed by recipient address

Recipient view: each grant at its grantee’s ZIP, mapped to a county. Directed view: each grant at the county its stated purpose names, falling back to the recipient’s county when the purpose names no place; US grants only. A county shows only if it carries the top 95% of that view’s dollars. Purposes are read from the foundation’s own 990 grant descriptions.

03Your 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
Butte Silver Bow Primary Health Care Clinic Inc

Southwest Montana Community Health Center is guided by its Mission to "Inspire Hope and Empower Wellness by Providing Access to Comprehensive Healthcare".

Health
2
South Central Montana Regional Mental Health Center

The region iii mental health center is a registered non-profit 501(c)(3) corporation dedicated to the establishment, development and maintenance of high quality mental health and chemical dependency care in south central montana.

3
Bozeman Deaconess Foundation

To support Bozeman Health Services by promoting community participation in and financial support of activities to improve community health and quality of life.

Philanthropy
4
St Luke Community Hospital

The mission of st. luke community healthcare is to remain an integral component of the communities of the mission valley through the delivery of personal, compassionate, quality health care in a dignified manner that values our patients,…

Health
5
Summit Community Care Clinic Inc

Provide exceptional, integrated, patient-centered health care services designed to meet the needs of all patients, particularly those who experience barriers to accessing care, regardless of their ability to pay.

Health
6
Missoula Community Foundation

To enhance community vitality by inspiring community giving and strengthening nonprofits

Community Improvement
7
Montana Healthcare Foundation
Philanthropy
8
Valley Community Emergency Food Bank Inc

Our mission is to end hunger in the valley county, montana area through food acquisition and distribution, education, and advocacy. our vision is a montana free from hunger where everyone has equal access to nutritious food.

Food & Nutrition
9
Bozeman Deaconess Health Services

To improve community health and quality of life.

Health
10
Butte-Silverbow Council On Aging

None

Health
11
Boulder Community Housing Corporation Inc

The mission statement of Boulder Community Housing Organization is to provide quality, affordable homes and foster thriving communities. They aim to create a diverse, inclusive, and sustainable Boulder by offering affordable housing…

Housing & Shelter
12
Montana Contractors Association Inc

Promotion and development of montana's construction industry.

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Montana Community Foundation Inc and the most unlike its peers is Silver Bow County Developmental Disabilities Council Inc. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

05the grantee network

8 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.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
1
Early backer (in before they grew)
8/8
Grantees still filing
5/8
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

SISTERS OF CHARITY OF LEAVENWORTH HEALTH SYSTEM INC — $19,106,011 · HealthSISTERS OF CHARITY OF LEAVENWORTH HEALTH SYSTEM INCST JAMES HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION INC — $2,550,446 · OtherST JAMES HEAL…+3 more — $89,000 · OtherMONTANA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC — $1,000,000 · PhilanthropyHELP CENTER INC — $25,000 · Human ServicesACTION INC — $10,000 · Human Services
Health$19,106,011Other$2,639,446Philanthropy$1,000,000Human Services$35,000

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

25%50%75%100%$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetSISTERS OF CHARITY OF LEAVENWORTH HEALTH SYSTEM INC — $19,106,011 over 6y, 0.5% of budgetST JAMES HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION INC — $2,550,446 over 8y, 37% of budgetMONTANA COMMUNITY FOUNDATION INC — $1,000,000 over 1y, 8.0% of budgetButte Emergency Food Bank — $50,500 over 1y, 2.5% of budgetSILVER BOW COUNTY DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES COUNCIL INC — $25,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetHELP CENTER INC — $25,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetBUTTE LOCAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION — $13,500 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetACTION INC — $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through you, not between each other.

Amazonsmile FoundationWA2.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: 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 St James Healthcare 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%3%10%23%40%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
    5report 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 8 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    More from the funding graph