· Private foundation
The Steele-Reese Foundation Xxxxx1004
Its FY2024 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 FY2019–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k9 grants · $60k
- $10k–50k61 grants · $1.5M
- $50k–250k4 grants · $228k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| WOLFE COUNTY HIGH SCHOOL | $70,000 |
| MADISON COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION | $54,500 |
| KNOX COUNTY G R HAMPTON | $53,000 |
| SALMON WHITEWATER PARK ASSOCIATION | $50,000 |
| KENTUCKY SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION | $45,000 |
| COWAN COMMUNITY ACTION GROUP INC | $40,000 |
| HARLAN COUNTY BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB | $40,000 |
| PERRY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION | $40,000 |
| PARTNERS FOR JUSTICE INC | $40,000 |
| RED BIRD MISSION INC | $40,000 |
| BOYD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION | $40,000 |
| WILLIAMSBURG INDEPENDENT SCHOOLS | $40,000 |
| SHAPING OUR APPALACHIAN REGION | $40,000 |
| CLINTON COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY | $40,000 |
| THRESH INC | $30,000 |
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 (FY19–24, $325k) land where the poverty rate runs at 18%, against an area that typically sits at 12%. 60% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-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 +35% since the first grant, against +34% for the ones you funded once.
109 repeat relationships — 33 still active in FY2024, 76 since wound down; 41 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (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 FY2024, 44% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $1.0M 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
- MNMONTANA NONPROFIT ASSOCIATION5× · 2019–2024 · $120k · revenue +8%
- PDPLENTY DOORS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION3× · 2021–2023 · $110k · revenue +377%
- TUTHE UNIV OF MONTANA-WESTERN FOUNDATION3× · 2020–2023 · $96k · revenue +455%
Funded once
- RCROCKCASTLE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATIONone grant, 2021 · $50k
- CCCUMBERLAND COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATIONone grant, 2020 · $50k
- HCHAZARD COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGEone grant, 2023 · $50k
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.
To collaborate with people across the state on local, regenerative, and culturally specific food systems that aim to protect, cultivate, distribute, and increase access to indigenous foods through the exchange of knowledge, skills, and…
To greatfully steward the land and singing waters with respect and care. To build a beloved community that values justice, equality, and love.
To promote public policy solutions that provide increased access to economic opportunities, greater individual freedoms and encourage greater participation in public matters by providing research and recommendation on public policy
The mblc exists to encourage and enact business-friendly policies that create good-paying jobs and make montana a better place to live. the primary purpose of the mblc is to educate the public on important business issues, enable citizens…
The mission of the montana land reliance (mlr) is to partner with landowners to provide permanent protection for private lands that are significant for agricultural production, fish and wildlife habitat, and open space.
To build an abundant, resilient, and valued local food system that supports our landscape, our farmers, ranchers, and food artisans, and our community.
To inspire connections to the landscapes, water, wildlife, recreation and agricultural heritage of west-central montana through conservation, now and for future generations.
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Community Council of Idaho Inc and the most unlike its peers is Richland County Coalition Against Domestic Violence 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 25 years old; the field is 16. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 22% startups (under 5 years old) — 4% of your grantees by number, and just 2% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.6% lost their exemption, against 13% 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.
144 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. 144 of the 309 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 STEELE MEMORIAL BENEFIT ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds MONTANA NONPROFIT ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds PLENTY DOORS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ↗
- Who funds SALMON WHITEWATER PARK ASSOCIATION INC ↗
- Who funds LEMHI REGIONAL LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds THE UNIV OF MONTANA-WESTERN FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds KENTUCKY SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds THRESH INC ↗
- Who funds TAMARACK GRIEF RESOURCE CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds COWAN COMMUNITY ACTION GROUP INC ↗
- Who funds SOUTHEAST SOUTH-CENTRAL EDUCATIONAL COOPERATIVE ↗
- Who funds CLARK FORK COALITION ↗
- Who funds APPALSHOP INC ↗
- Who funds Chief Joseph Foundation ↗
- Who funds LEE PESKY LEARNING CENTER INC ↗
- Who funds University of Idaho Foundation Inc ↗
- Who funds MONTANA LEGAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION ↗
- Who funds GATEWAY JUVENILE DIVERSION PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds KALISPELL REGIONAL HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION ↗
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: Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · Montana Community Foundation Inc · Town Pump Charitable Foundation · Headwaters Health Foundation of Western Montana · Treacy Foundation · Sample Foundation Inc · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · The High Stakes Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · Gianforte Family Charitable Trust · Montana Healthcare Foundation · The Arthur M Blank Family 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 The Steele-Reese Foundation Xxxxx1004 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.
- Western Rivers Conservancy — 0% of income from government
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 The Steele-Reese Foundation Xxxxx1004?
Find your warmest path to The Steele-Reese Foundation Xxxxx1004 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.