Skip to content
Veazey Family Foundation at a glance

· Private foundation

Veazey Family Foundation

Its FY2024 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$67k
Granted FY2024still arriving
7
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$25k
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, FY2020 to 2024.

Youth Development$75kHousing & Shelter$40kHuman Services$30kAnimals$25kArts & Culture$23kFood & Nutrition$10kCommunity Improvement$8kEnvironment$6kOther$0
02FY2024 · 7 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $2k
  • $10k–50k5 grants · $65k
$10,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$2.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB MISSOULA COUNTY$25,000
POVERELLO CENTER$10,000
MISSOULA BUTTERFLY HOUSE$10,000
MISSOULA FOOD BANK$10,000
YWCA$10,000
MISSOULA WRITING COLLABORATIVE$1,000
MISSOULA DOWNTOWN FOUNDATION$1,000
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:

Dollar for dollar, its grants (FY20–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 9%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 3% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%MONTANA HISTORY FOUNDATION: $1k → 9%POVERELLO CENTER: $10k → 9%FLATHEAD LAKERS: $5k → 18%POVERELLO CENTER: $10k → 9%FLATHEAD LAKE BIO STATIONS: $1k → 18%POVERELLO CENTER: $10k → 9%POVERELLO CENTER: $10k → 9%MISSOULA CHILDREN'S THEATER: $5k → 9%MISSOULA CHILDREN'S THEATER: $5k → 9%MISSOULA DOWNTOWN FOUNDATION: $3k → 9%MISSOULA DOWNTOWN FOUNDATION: $3k → 9%MISSOULA DOWNTOWN FOUNDATION: $1k → 9%MISSOULA DOWNTOWN FOUNDATION: $1k → 9%BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB MISSOULA COUNTY: $25k → 9%BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB MISSOULA COUNTY: $25k → 9%YWCA: $10k → 9%MISSOULA FOOD BANK: $10k → 9%BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB MISSOULA COUNTY: $10k → 9%YWCA: $10k → 9%YWCA: $10k → 9%BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB MISSOULA COUNTY: $10k → 9%BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB MISSOULA COUNTY: $5k → 9%MISSOULA INTERFAITH COLLABORATIVE: $5k → 9%MISSOULA COMMUNITY CHORUS: $1k → 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.

90%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$199k · 7 repeat orgs$23k to everyone else

7 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2024, 1 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
5

Total granted

$199k
$13k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

-12%
+42%

Still filing today

71%
80%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 85% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

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

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

’20’21’22’23’24
Arts & CultureYouth DevelopmentHousing & ShelterCommunity ImprovementReligionEnvironmentOther
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

  • BA
    Boys and Girls Club of Missoula County
    5× · 2020–2024 · $75k · revenue -20%
  • PC
    POVERELLO CENTER INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $40k · revenue +5%
  • Y
    YWCA
    3× · 2021–2024 · $30k

Funded once

  • MI
    MISSOULA INTERFAITH COLLABORATIVEgraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue +42%
  • FL
    FLATHEAD LAKERS INC
    one grant, 2021 · $5k · revenue -19%
  • MH
    MONTANA HISTORY FOUNDATION
    one grant, 2021 · $1k · revenue -15%
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
Missoula Community Foundation

To enhance community vitality by inspiring community giving and strengthening nonprofits

Community Improvement
2
Missoula Midtown Foundation

Funding and conducting research on issues associated with the ongoing development, infrastructure, historical preservation, and planning of Missoula Midtown and operating educational programs to educate the public about these issues.

Community Improvement
3
Missoula Area Chamber of Commerce

An association providing community leadership and business advocacy sustaining economic vitality.

—
4
Scenic Montana Trails
—
5
Missoula Public Library Foundation

The mission of the missoula public library foundation is to advocate for the missoula public library and raise funds for library initiatives that enhance our community

Education
6
Pondera Arts Council

Providing quality live performances for the conrad area

Arts & Culture
7
Missoula Urban Demonstration Project

MUD empowers people to build a more sustainable community through hands-on learning in our Workshops, shared resources in our Tool Library, and by providing a living example of sustainable urban living at our Demonstration Site

—
8
Montana Healthcare Foundation
Philanthropy
9
Missoula Mountain Bike Coalition

Missoula mountain bike coalition's mission is to promote and create mountain biking opportunities in missoula and surrounding areas through trail building, stewardship, advocacy and outreach.

Recreation & Sports
10
Montana Business Leadership Council

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…

Community Improvement
11
Montana Conservation Corps Inc

Montana Conservation Corps (MCC) inspires young people through hands-on conservation service to be leaders, stewards of the land and engaged citizens who improve their communities.

Civil Rights
12
Missoula Community School

To provide early high-quality education to children in the missoula community ages 2 to 6 years.

Education
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Poverello Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Flathead Lakers 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

10 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. 10 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
10/10
Grantees still filing
4/10
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Boys and Girls Club of Missoula County: $75,000 · Youth DevelopmentBoys and Girls Club of Missoula CountyYWCA: $30,000 · OtherYWCAMISSOULA BUTTERFLY HOUSE: $25,000 · OtherMISSOULA BUTTERFLY HOUSEMCT INC: $10,000 · OtherMCT INC+1 more: $1,000 · OtherPOVERELLO CENTER INC: $40,000 · Housing & ShelterPOVERELLO CENTER INCMISSOULA WRITING COLLABORATIVE: $11,000 · Arts & CultureMONTANA HISTORY FOUNDATION: $1,000 · Arts & CultureMISSOULA COMMUNITY CHORUS INC: $1,000 · Arts & CultureMISSOULA FOOD BANK & COMMUNITY CENTER: $10,000 · Food & NutritionMISSOULA DOWNTOWN FOUNDATION INC: $8,000 · Community ImprovementMISSOULA INTERFAITH COLLABORATIVE: $5,000 · ReligionFLATHEAD LAKERS INC: $5,000 · Environment
Youth Development$75,000Other$66,000Housing & Shelter$40,000Arts & Culture$13,000Food & Nutrition$10,000Community Improvement$8,000Religion$5,000Environment$5,000

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 budgetBoys and Girls Club of Missoula County: $75,000 over 5y, 2.7% of budgetPOVERELLO CENTER INC: $40,000 over 4y, 0.2% of budgetMISSOULA WRITING COLLABORATIVE: $11,000 over 3y, 1.7% of budgetMISSOULA FOOD BANK & COMMUNITY CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMCT INC: $10,000 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetMISSOULA DOWNTOWN FOUNDATION INC: $8,000 over 4y, 0.5% of budgetMISSOULA INTERFAITH COLLABORATIVE: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetFLATHEAD LAKERS INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetMONTANA HISTORY FOUNDATION: $1,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetMISSOULA COMMUNITY CHORUS INC: $1,000 over 1y, 3.9% 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.

Dennis & Phyllis Wash…First Interstate Banc…Max and Betty Swanson…The Bill & Rosemary G…The Llewellyn Foundat…Headwaters Health Fou…Missoula Community Fo…Sample Foundation IncGianforte Family Char…Town Pump Charitable …Montana Community Fou…M J Murdock Charitabl…
Dennis & Phyllis Washington FoundationMT17.6× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Dennis & Phyllis Washington Foundation · First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Max and Betty Swanson Foundation · The Bill & Rosemary Gallagher Foundation · The Llewellyn Foundation · Headwaters Health Foundation of Western Montana · Missoula Community Foundation · Sample Foundation Inc · Gianforte Family Charitable Trust · Town Pump Charitable Foundation · Montana Community Foundation Inc · M J Murdock Charitable Trust

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 Veazey Family Foundation funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Veazey Family Foundation. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%funder's share of their income ↑0%10%20%30%40%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    4report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–40%
    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-PF e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Veazey Family’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