Skip to content
St Peter's Health at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

St Peter's Health

To improve the health, wellness and quality of life of the people and communities we serve.

$135k
Granted FY2025still arriving
4
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$44k
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.

Health$419kFood & Nutrition$142kEducation$46kRecreation & Sports$38kScience & Tech$27kHuman Services$25kYouth Development$19kCrime & Legal$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 4 grants below total $86,739, the rows itemized in this filing. The $134,989 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $48,250 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 · $6k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $81k
$20,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$447M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
ST PETER'S HEALTH FOUNDATION$43,739
HELENA PUBLIC SCHOOLS$20,000
CARROLL COLLEGE ATHLETICS$17,500
HELENA COMMUNITY GARDENS$5,500
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 (FY20–24, $51k) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 8%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 8%Exploration Works: $20k → 9%Helena Family YMCA: $16k → 9%EXPLORATION WORKS: $9k → 9%Exploration Works: $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.

89%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$652k · 5 repeat orgs$78k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +87% since the first grant, against 0% for those funded once.

5 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2025, 3 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

5
6

Total granted

$652k
$53k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+87%
0%

Still filing today

100%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $26k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’17’20’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesFood & NutritionEducationYouth DevelopmentRecreation & SportsEnvironmentOther
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

  • SP
    ST PETER'S HEALTH FOUNDATION
    5× · 2017–2025 · $398k · revenue +382%
  • HF
    HELENA FOOD SHARE INC
    6× · 2017–2024 · $136k · revenue +87%
  • CC
    CARROLL COLLEGE
    5× · 2017–2025 · $64k · revenue +3%

Funded once

  • YM
    YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF HELENA INC
    one grant, 2020 · $16k · revenue -35%
  • HP
    HELENA POLICE DEPARTMENT
    one grant, 2017 · $10k
  • GD
    GREAT DIVIDE SKI PATROL FOUNDATION INC
    one grant, 2023 · $10k · revenue -89%
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
Sweet Medical Center

Empowering people to live healthy lives.

—
2
Montana Chamber of Commerce

To create and sustain an optimal business climate, business prosperity and a strong montana economy through advocacy, education and collaboration, working to provide an empowered and educated workforce, reduce business growth obstacles,…

—
3
Colorado Museum of Natural History

Be a catalyst! Ignite our community's passion for nature and science.

Arts & Culture
4
Minnesota Medical Association

To be the leading voice of medicine to make minnesota the healthiest state and the best place to practice.

—
5
Arbor Research Collaborative for Health

Arbor research collaborative for health is committed to improving patient care through research that shapes medical policies and practice. in particular, arbor research conducts health outcomes research on chronic disease and end-stage…

Health
6
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
7
Montana Hospital Association

Montana hospital association is the principal advocate for the interests of members in their efforts to improve the health status of the communities they serve.

—
8
Duluth Cross Country Ski Club

Promote health through skiing

Recreation & Sports
9
Minnesota Land Trust

The minnesota land trust protects and restores minnesota's most vital natural lands in order to provide wildlife habitat, clean water, outdoor experiences and scenic beauty for generations to come.

Environment
10
The Minnesota Camp Fire Foundation

Ensure camp fire minnesota's strong future. with nature as the catalyst, camp fire minnesota energizes youth to discover their spark so their futures glow brighter.

Youth Development
11
Girdwood Health Clinic Inc

Our mission is to build healthier communities by providing high-quality primary care that integrates physical and behavioral health while removing barriers to wellness.

Health
12
Catholic Social Services of Montana

Based on our commitment to catholic social teaching, catholic social services of montana provides for works of advocacy, compassion, pastoral outreach, education and social justice.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Cancer Support Community of Montana; the most unlike its peers is Girls Thrive 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

9 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. 9 of the 13 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
9/9
Grantees still filing
6/9
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

ST PETER'S HEALTH FOUNDATION: $397,583 · OtherST PETER'S HEALTH FOUNDATIONHELENA PUBLIC SCHOOLS: $20,000 · Other+3 more: $21,382 · OtherHELENA FOOD SHARE INC: $136,000 · Food & NutritionHELENA FOOD SHARE INCCARROLL COLLEGE: $64,000 · EducationCARROLL C…EXPLORATIONWORKS INC: $35,180 · Human ServicesYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF HELENA INC: $16,000 · Human ServicesGirls Thrive Inc: $19,400 · Youth DevelopmentGREAT DIVIDE SKI PATROL FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 · Recreation & SportsPRICKLY PEAR LAND TRUST: $5,500 · EnvironmentCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY OF MONTANA: $5,300 · Health
Other$438,965Food & Nutrition$136,000Education$64,000Human Services$51,180Youth Development$19,400Recreation & Sports$10,000Environment$5,500Health$5,300

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 budgetST PETER'S HEALTH FOUNDATION: $397,583 over 5y, 3.3% of budgetHELENA FOOD SHARE INC: $136,000 over 6y, 0.6% of budgetCARROLL COLLEGE: $64,000 over 5y, 0.0% of budgetEXPLORATIONWORKS INC: $35,180 over 3y, 2.7% of budgetGirls Thrive Inc: $19,400 over 3y, 13% of budgetYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF HELENA INC: $16,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetGREAT DIVIDE SKI PATROL FOUNDATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 5.4% of budgetPRICKLY PEAR LAND TRUST: $5,500 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY OF MONTANA: $5,300 over 1y, 0.5% 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.

United Way of the Lew…Town Pump Charitable …Merlin Foundation IncDennis & Phyllis Wash…First Interstate Banc…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
United Way of the Lewis and Clark Area IncMT15.7× affinity5 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: United Way of the Lewis and Clark Area Inc · Town Pump Charitable Foundation · Merlin Foundation Inc · Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation 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 St Peter's Health funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from St Peter's Health. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%funder's share of their income ↑0%13%25%38%50%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
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–50%
    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 13 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 St Peter's Health’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