· Private foundation
The Susan Kay Pederson Foundation
Its FY2024 filing reports that it funds preselected organizations and did not take unsolicited requests; check the foundation's own site before ruling it out.
What you funded, over time
Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year — across FY2017–2024.
Where the money goes
Your grants by size, and where they go.
By grant size · FY2024
- Under $10k12 grants · $49k
- $10k–50k5 grants · $60k
- $50k–250k2 grants · $104k
| Recipient | Amount |
|---|---|
| EAGLE MOUNT | $53,530 |
| CROSSCUT MOUNTAIN CENTER | $50,000 |
| HAVEN | $15,000 |
| REACH | $15,000 |
| IMAGINE IF LIBRARY FOUNDATION | $10,200 |
| GALLATIN VALLEY LAND TRUST | $10,000 |
| HRDC | $10,000 |
| PROP | $7,500 |
| ROOTS FAMILY COLLABORATIVE | $7,500 |
| ST LABRE INDIAN SCHOOL | $7,000 |
| THRIVE | $6,000 |
| SPECIAL OLYMPICS OF MONTANA | $5,000 |
| FAMILY PROMISE OF BOZEMAN | $5,000 |
| BOZEMAN HELP CENTER | $3,750 |
| CANCER SUPPORT CENTER | $3,750 |
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 (FY17–24, $116k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 9% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Your grants skew toward lower-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 +40% since the first grant, against +38% for the ones you funded once.
32 repeat relationships — 18 still active in FY2024, 14 since wound down; 1 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, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $200 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
- EMEagle Mount8× · 2017–2024 · $244k · revenue +40%
- GVGALLATIN VALLEY LAND TRUST8× · 2017–2024 · $58k · revenue +234%
- BDBozeman Deaconess Foundation3× · 2017–2019 · $55k · revenue +1%
Funded once
- WTWALK TO END ALZHEIMER'S MT CHAPTERone grant, 2020 · $13k
CHARITY GLOBAL INCone grant, 2019 · $10k · revenue +5%- NMNAMI MINNESOTAgraduatedone grant, 2023 · $8k · revenue +38%
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.
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.
Provide food for individuals in need
Planned Parenthood of Montana empowers all people to make informed decisions and ensures the freedom to manage their own sexuality, and personal health by providing the highest quality confidential healthcare services, education, and…
Health care services for the people of western nebraska and eastern wyoming.
Empowering people of all abilities to reach their full potential. we provide individualized services that maximize independence, boosts community engagement and improves physical and emotional well-being.
The purposes of the corporation shall be specifically to operate a statewide coordinated health information exchange and related services to enhance clinical care in the community and to improve and promote public health care in the…
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.
The vermont community foundation helps to build philanthropic resources to sustain healthy and vital vermont communities. the foundation connects and mobilizes people through giving to multiply the impact of philanthropy.
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.
"With open hearts and expertise, we serve the seriously ill and those touched by loss." Our grief and loss program is provided to patients' loved ones, but is also available to other members of our community. Palliative services are…
To enhance, every day, the health of our patients, our families and our communities. We do that through a range of health care services for people of all ages, in a variety of care settings.
Our mission is to empower and support runners and walkers of all ages, abilities, and backgrounds in Missoula. With a vibrant community of over 2,400 members, we provide a welcoming space for like-minded individuals to connect and explore…
For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Make-a-Wish Foundation of South Dakota & Montana and the most unlike its peers is Charity Global 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 31 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.
The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.
The orgs you fund almost never close — 0.0% lost their exemption, against 8% 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.
34 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. 34 of the 73 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
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 Eagle Mount ↗
- Who funds REACH INC ↗
- Who funds THRIVE INC ↗
- Who funds GALLATIN VALLEY LAND TRUST ↗
- Who funds Bozeman Deaconess Foundation ↗
- Who funds HAVEN ↗
- Who funds BIG SKY YOUTH EMPOWERMENT PROJECT INC ↗
- Who funds Intermountain Deaconess Childrens Services ↗
- Who funds SPECIAL OLYMPICS MONTANA INC ↗
- Who funds FLATHEAD LIBRARY FOUNDATION ↗
- Who funds Montana Outdoor Science School ↗
- Who funds HEART OF THE VALLEY INC ↗
- Who funds International Rescue Committee INC ↗
- Who funds ROOTS FAMILY COLLABORATIVE ↗
- Who funds CHARITY GLOBAL INC ↗
- Who funds CANCER SUPPORT COMMUNITY OF MONTANA ↗
- Who funds NAMI MINNESOTA ↗
- Who funds DIRECT RELIEF ↗
- Who funds PEOPLE REACHING OUT TO OTHER PEOPLE INC ↗
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: First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Montana Community Foundation Inc · Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · One Valley Community Foundation · Town Pump Charitable Foundation · Gilhousen Family Foundation · Morgan Family Foundation Inc · Sample Foundation Inc · The Arthur M Blank Family Foundation · Assurant Foundation · First Security Bank 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 Susan Kay Pederson Foundation 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.
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.