Skip to content
United Way of the Lewis and Clark Area Inc at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

United Way of the Lewis and Clark Area Inc

Increase the organized capacity of people to care for one another in our community.

$158k
Granted FY2023
9
Grants FY2023
—
States reached
$41k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0199% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2023.

Human Services$409kFood & Nutrition$396kYouth Development$169kHousing & Shelter$162kEducation$107kHealth$44kPublic Safety & Disaster$37kCrime & Legal$32kOther$0
02FY2023 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 9 grants below total $104,544, the rows itemized in this filing. The $157,744 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $53,200 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 · FY2023

  • Under $10k6 grants · $40k
  • $10k–50k3 grants · $64k
$7,637
Median grant
—
States reached
$855k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
HELENA FOOD SHARE$40,724
THE FRIENDSHIP CENTER$12,119
ANGEL FUND$11,334
CASA OF LEWIS AND CLARK$9,122
FAMILY PROMISE HELENA$7,637
YWCA OF HELENA$6,229
RMDC HOME DELIV MEAL$6,173
FLORENCE CRITTENTON$6,026
Individual grant recipient$5,180
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 (FY17–21, $212k) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 8% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%BROADWATER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $4k → 9%RURAL DYNAMICS: $7k → 14%BROADWATER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $3k → 9%RURAL DYNAMICS: $7k → 14%BROADWATER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $2k → 9%RURAL DYNAMICS: $3k → 14%BROADWATER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $1k → 9%VOICES OF HOPE GREAT FALLS: $40 → 14%BROADWATER COUNTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION: $360 → 9%RURAL DYNAMICS: $28 → 14%YMCA: $26k → 9%FLORENCE CRITTENTON HOME: $19k → 9%FLORENCE CRITTENTON HOME: $19k → 9%YMCA: $14k → 9%YWCA: $14k → 9%YMCA: $14k → 9%YWCA: $13k → 9%FAMILY OUTREACH: $10k → 9%FLORENCE CRITTENTON HOME: $8k → 9%YWCA: $6k → 9%EXPLORATION WORKS: $5k → 9%FLORENCE CRITTENTON HOME: $5k → 9%FAMILY OUTREACH: $5k → 9%FAMILY OUTREACH: $5k → 9%YWCA: $4k → 9%FLORENCE CRITTENTON HOME: $2k → 9%YOUTH CONNECTIONS: $2k → 9%EXPLORATION WORKS: $2k → 9%YMCA: $2k → 9%YOUTH CONNECTIONS: $1k → 9%FAMILY OUTREACH: $1k → 9%EXPLORATION WORKS: $974 → 9%YMCA: $970 → 9%EXPLORATION WORKS: $929 → 9%YOUTH CONNECTIONS: $780 → 9%YWCA: $780 → 9%FAMILY OUTREACH: $516 → 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.

92%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$1.3M · 37 repeat orgs$108k to everyone else

37 repeat relationships: 0 still active in FY2023, 37 since wound down; 9 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

37
3

Total granted

$1.3M
$3k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+38%
+100%

Still filing today

70%
33%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 0% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $105k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’23
Human ServicesHousing & ShelterEducationYouth DevelopmentFood & NutritionCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • HF
    HELENA FOOD SHARE INC
    5× · 2017–2021 · $190k · revenue +87%
  • RM
    ROCKY MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
    5× · 2017–2021 · $167k · revenue +20%
  • GL
    GODS LOVE INC
    4× · 2017–2020 · $100k · revenue +38%

Funded once

  • HI
    Helena Industries Inc Entity in Bankruptcy
    one grant, 2018 · $3k · revenue -100%
  • CH
    CULTIVATE HELENA
    one grant, 2018 · $317
  • VO
    VOICES OF HOPEgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $40 · revenue +100%
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
Helena Community Connections Inc
—
2
Family & Children's Services of Mid-Michigan Inc

We inspire hope and well-being for people of all ages by providing counseling, education and support.

Human Services
3
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.

—
4
Opportunities Inc

Opportunities, Inc. partnering within each community, will respectfully support and educate individuals to achieve self-reliance.

Human Services
5
Family Connections Inc

Family connections utilizes the strength of community to support exceptional early childhood experiences.

Health
6
Haven

For more than four decades, haven has been bozemans trusted community partner in providing safe shelter, support (including a 24-hour support line and legal advocacy), and counseling for survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, sex…

—
7
Denali Family Services

Supporting children and families through individual, community-based services. We provide behavioral health services to severely emotionally disturbed children (ages 2 to 24) and their families.

Health
8
Lincoln Behavioral Services

To provide comprehensive outpatient mental health services to over 5400 individuals and their families in a consumer driven person centered delivery system. Approximately 15% of our staff members are our clients who are involved in a…

Health
9
Jobs Now Inc Dba Montana West Economic Development

To build upon the economic base in flathead county by assisting business startups and expansion activities with resources and valuable connections. montana west delivers local business economic development services targeted to impact job…

—
10
Mountainland Head Start

Empowering young children and families along a path to their highest potential.

Education
11
Central Montana Head Start

Central montana head start is an early learning center that empowers the whole child and family through health, education, and self-sufficiency.

Education
12
Hope Community Resources Inc

To provide services and supports, requested and designed by individuals and families who experience disabilities, resulting in choice, control, and family preservation and community inclusion.

Health
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Ywca Helena; the most unlike its peers is Gods Love 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

30 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. 30 of the 49 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)
13
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/30
Grantees still filing
21/30
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

GODS LOVE INC: $99,659 · OtherGODS LOVE INCBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF CENTRAL MONTANA: $84,483 · OtherBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF CENTRAL MONTA…ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF HELENA MONTANA A CORPORATION SOLE: $51,251 · OtherROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESE OF HELENA MONTANA …HELENA FOOD SHARE: $40,724 · OtherHELENA FOOD SHARECATHOLIC SOCIAL SERVICES OF MONTANA: $24,976 · OtherPEERS UNLIMITED: $24,886 · Other+26 more: $191,177 · Other+26 moreYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF HELENA INC: $57,379 · Human ServicesYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIA…FLORENCE CRITTENTON HOME AND SERVICES: $53,389 · Human ServicesFLORENCE CRITTENTON …YOUTH HOMES: $50,555 · Human ServicesYOUTH HOMESYWCA HELENA: $38,862 · Human ServicesYWCA HELENAREGION IV FAMILY OUTREACH INC: $21,734 · Human ServicesREGION IV FAMILY OUT…RURAL DYNAMICS INC: $16,772 · Human ServicesRURAL DYNAMICS INCBROADWATER COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES: $10,876 · Human ServicesEXPLORATIONWORKS INC: $9,048 · Human Services+2 more: $3,835 · Human ServicesHELENA FOOD SHARE INC: $189,804 · Food & NutritionHELENA FOOD SHA…ROCKY MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $167,204 · Community ImprovementROCKY MOUNTAI…FRIENDSHIP CENTER OF HELENA INC: $93,464 · Housing & ShelterFRIENDSHIP …FAMILY PROMISE INC: $50,400 · Housing & ShelterFAMILY PROM…THE ANGEL FUND: $83,534 · EducationLEWIS & CLARK LITERACY COUNCIL: $23,742 · EducationFIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASA-GAL PROGRAM: $31,916 · Crime & Legal
Other$517,156Human Services$262,450Food & Nutrition$189,804Community Improvement$167,204Housing & Shelter$143,864Education$107,276Crime & Legal$31,916

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 budgetHELENA FOOD SHARE INC: $189,804 over 5y, 1.8% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $167,204 over 5y, 0.6% of budgetGODS LOVE INC: $99,659 over 4y, 8.4% of budgetFRIENDSHIP CENTER OF HELENA INC: $93,464 over 5y, 6.0% of budgetBIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF CENTRAL MONTANA: $84,483 over 5y, 7.1% of budgetTHE ANGEL FUND: $83,534 over 5y, 17% of budgetYOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF HELENA INC: $57,379 over 5y, 1.5% of budgetFLORENCE CRITTENTON HOME AND SERVICES: $53,389 over 5y, 1.3% of budgetYOUTH HOMES: $50,555 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetFAMILY PROMISE INC: $50,400 over 5y, 0.5% of budgetYWCA HELENA: $38,862 over 5y, 3.0% of budgetFIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASA-GAL PROGRAM: $31,916 over 5y, 9.7% of budgetCATHOLIC SOCIAL SERVICES OF MONTANA: $24,976 over 4y, 2.0% of budgetLEWIS & CLARK LITERACY COUNCIL: $23,742 over 4y, 24% of budgetREGION IV FAMILY OUTREACH INC: $21,734 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetRURAL DYNAMICS INC: $16,772 over 4y, 1.3% of budgetWEST MONT: $15,732 over 4y, 0.1% of budgetLEWIS & CLARK COUNTY SEARCH & RESCUE ASSOCIATION: $12,713 over 4y, 31% of budgetBROADWATER COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES: $10,876 over 5y, 2.0% of budgetEXPLORATIONWORKS INC: $9,048 over 4y, 0.9% of budgetGIRL SCOUTS OF MONTANA AND WYOMING: $9,037 over 5y, 0.2% of budgetCAREER TRAINING INSTITUTE: $8,652 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetCHILD CARE CONNECTIONS INC: $7,380 over 3y, 0.2% of budgetMONTANA VETERANS FOUNDATION INC: $6,720 over 2y, 4.5% of budgetHELENA AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY: $5,686 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetYouth Connections Foundation: $3,795 over 3y, 1.3% of budgetHelena Industries Inc Entity in Bankruptcy: $3,132 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetCENTER FOR MENTAL HEALTH: $151 over 2y, 0.0% 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 HELENA FOOD SHARE INC ↗
  • Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds GODS LOVE INC ↗
  • Who funds FRIENDSHIP CENTER OF HELENA INC ↗
  • Who funds BIG BROTHERS BIG SISTERS OF CENTRAL MONTANA ↗
  • Who funds THE ANGEL FUND ↗
  • Who funds YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF HELENA INC ↗
  • Who funds FLORENCE CRITTENTON HOME AND SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds YOUTH HOMES ↗
  • Who funds FAMILY PROMISE INC ↗
  • Who funds YWCA HELENA ↗
  • Who funds FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT CASA-GAL PROGRAM ↗
  • Who funds CATHOLIC SOCIAL SERVICES OF MONTANA ↗
  • Who funds LEWIS & CLARK LITERACY COUNCIL ↗
  • Who funds REGION IV FAMILY OUTREACH INC ↗
  • Who funds RURAL DYNAMICS INC ↗
  • Who funds WEST MONT ↗
  • Who funds LEWIS & CLARK COUNTY SEARCH & RESCUE ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds BROADWATER COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES ↗
  • Who funds EXPLORATIONWORKS INC ↗
  • Who funds GIRL SCOUTS OF MONTANA AND WYOMING ↗
  • Who funds CAREER TRAINING INSTITUTE ↗
  • Who funds CHILD CARE CONNECTIONS INC ↗
  • Who funds MONTANA VETERANS FOUNDATION INC ↗
  • Who funds Girls Thrive Inc ↗
  • Who funds HELENA AREA HABITAT FOR HUMANITY ↗

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.

Town Pump Charitable …Dennis & Phyllis Wash…Montana Community Fou…First Interstate Banc…Helena Area Community…Treacy FoundationOtto Bremer TrustThe Wall Family-Power…Headwaters Health Fou…Gianforte Family Char…Sample Foundation IncHauser Lake Home
Town Pump Charitable FoundationMT43.3× affinity19 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Town Pump Charitable Foundation · Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · Montana Community Foundation Inc · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Helena Area Community Foundation · Treacy Foundation · Otto Bremer Trust · The Wall Family-Power Townsend Foundation · Headwaters Health Foundation of Western Montana · Gianforte Family Charitable Trust · Sample Foundation Inc · Hauser Lake Home

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 United Way of the Lewis and Clark Area Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from United Way of the Lewis and Clark Area Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%5%11%20%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →median 2%
  • Family Promise Inc: 2% of income from government
no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
0get no government money at all
11report 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.

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 49 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

Source object · view filing

Play a game based on United Way of the Lewis and Clark Area’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