Skip to content
Western Organization of Resource Councils at a glanceMostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Western Organization of Resource Councils

To advance the vision of the democratic, sustainable, and just society through community action.

$797k
Granted FY2024still arriving
12
Grants FY2024still arriving
4
States reached
$460k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its 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.

Community Improvement$530kPublic Benefit$442kCivil Rights$195kEnvironment$140kEducation$35kHealth$15k
02FY2024 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k1 grant · $6k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $161k
  • $50k–250k2 grants · $155k
  • $250k+1 grant · $460k
$28,500
Median grant
4
States reached
$1.9M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
A BETTER BIG SKY$460,000
WESTERN NATIVE VOICE$105,000
WESTERN COLORADO ALLIANCE$50,000
DAKOTA RURAL ACTION$35,000
MONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS$30,000
WILD MONTANA ACTION FUND$28,500
MONTANA FEDERATION OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES FOUNDATION$16,000
FORWARD MONTANA$15,000
PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MONTANA$15,000
MT RURAL VOTERS ACTION$11,000
BIG SKY FIFTY FIVE PLUS$10,000
DAKOTA RESOURCE COUNCIL$6,250
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 14%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 100% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 9%Blue Green Alliance Fdn: $25k → 11%MONTANA FEDERATION OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES FOUNDATION: $16k → 9%FORWARD MONTANA: $15k → 9%WESTERN NATIVE VOICE: $105k → 9%Black Prog Action Coalition: $120k → 14%Appalachian Voices: $25k → 21%AK Progressive Donor Table: $70k → 22%DAKOTA RESOURCE COUNCIL: $6k → 10%DAKOTA RURAL ACTION: $35k → 13%PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF MONTANA: $15k → 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.

Which US states its grants reach

AK
MT
ND
MN
MI
SD
CO
KY
NC
DC
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 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
Montana Policy Action Inc

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

Social Science
2
Northern Plains Resource Council

Northern Plains believes people working together can make a difference. Our mission is to organize Montanans to protect our water, land, air, and working landscapes; support a healthy, localized, and sustainable economy in farm and ranch…

Community Improvement
3
Colorado People's Action

Colorado people's action (cpa) is a member-driven, racial justice organization dedicated to winning long-lasting progressive public policies in colorado. cpa builds power by mobilizing voters, electing our own people to office, holding…

—
4
Montana Wilderness Association

Uniting and mobilizing communities to keep montana wild.

Environment
5
Nw Energy Coalition

The NW Energy Coalition is an alliance of over 100 environmental, civic, and human service organizations, utilities, and businesses in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Montana, and British Columbia, plus many individual members. The NW Energy…

—
6
Alaskans for Better Elections Foundation
Civil Rights
7
Montana Association of Conservation Districts

To heighten the public's awareness of conservation districts and their activities as well as to promote soil and water conservation.

—
8
Working Montanans

Working Montanans' mission is to advocate for an economy that works for working people and other critical issues.

—
9
New Approach Montana

New Approach Montana is a registered Montana ballot question committee in support of two 2020 ballot initiatives for the legalization of marijuana for adults 21 and older.

—
10
Alaska Wilderness League Action

Alaska wilderness league action (awla) deploys citizen support to realize political change, legislative gains and accountability of congress and the administration to protect alaska's wild landscapes.

Environment
11
Alaska Wildlife Alliance

Support ecosystem-based wildlife management by increasing public awareness of wildlife issues, responding to information requests, advocating for science-based wildlife habitat management through proposal and comment submissions, and…

Environment
12
Montana Weed Control Association Inc

Strengthen and support noxious weed management

Environment
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is A Better Big Sky; the most unlike its peers is Big Sky Fifty Five Plus. 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

18 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. 18 of the 20 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.

2
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
5
Early backer (in before they grew)
17/18
Grantees still filing
7/18
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

A BETTER BIG SKY: $460,000 · Community ImprovementA BETTER BIG SKYAlaska Progressive Donor Table: $70,000 · Community ImprovementAlaska Progressive Donor TableWESTERN COLORADO ALLIANCE: $50,000 · Community ImprovementWESTERN COLORADO ALLIANCEMT Rural Voters Action Fund: $233,300 · OtherMT Rural Voters Action FundBLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITION: $120,000 · OtherBLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITIONWESTERN NATIVE VOICE EDUCATION PROJECT: $105,000 · OtherWESTERN NATIVE VOICE EDUCATION PROJECTKENTUCKIANS FOR THE COMMONWEALTH INC: $25,000 · Other+1 more: $13,000 · OtherMONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $30,000 · EnvironmentMONTANA CON…WILD MONTANA ACTION FUND: $28,500 · EnvironmentWILD MONTAN…APPALACHIAN VOICES: $25,000 · EnvironmentAPPALACHIAN…BlueGreen Alliance Foundation: $25,000 · EnvironmentBlueGreen A…RENEW MISSOURI ACTION: $25,000 · EnvironmentRENEW MISSO…DAKOTA RESOURCE COUNCIL: $6,250 · EnvironmentNative Peoples Action Inc: $50,000 · Civil RightsDakota Rural Action: $35,000 · EducationFORWARD MT FOUNDATION: $15,000 · HealthIntermountain Planned Parenthood: $15,000 · HealthMONTANA FEDERATION OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES FOUNDATION: $16,000 · Public BenefitBIG SKY FIFTY FIVE PLUS: $10,000 · Public Benefit
Community Improvement$580,000Other$496,300Environment$139,750Civil Rights$50,000Education$35,000Health$30,000Public Benefit$26,000

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 budgetA BETTER BIG SKY: $460,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetBLACK PROGRESSIVE ACTION COALITION: $120,000 over 1y, 37% of budgetWESTERN NATIVE VOICE EDUCATION PROJECT: $105,000 over 1y, 5.0% of budgetAlaska Progressive Donor Table: $70,000 over 1y, 13% of budgetWESTERN COLORADO ALLIANCE: $50,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetNative Peoples Action Inc: $50,000 over 1y, 11% of budgetDakota Rural Action: $35,000 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetMONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND: $30,000 over 1y, 3.4% of budgetWILD MONTANA ACTION FUND: $28,500 over 1y, 4.7% of budgetAPPALACHIAN VOICES: $25,000 over 1y, 0.9% of budgetBlueGreen Alliance Foundation: $25,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetKENTUCKIANS FOR THE COMMONWEALTH INC: $25,000 over 1y, 2.1% of budgetMONTANA FEDERATION OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES FOUNDATION: $16,000 over 1y, 76% of budgetFORWARD MT FOUNDATION: $15,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetIntermountain Planned Parenthood: $15,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetDAKOTA RESOURCE COUNCIL: $6,250 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.

Western Organization …Sixteen Thirty FundAll Hands on Deck Net…Tides FoundationNew Venture FundAmerica VotesResources Legacy FundPatagoniaorgThe William & Flora H…Amalgamated Charitabl…American Online Givin…Donor Advised Charita…
Western Organization of Resource Councils Education ProjectMT24.2× affinity9 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Western Organization of Resource Councils Education Project · Sixteen Thirty Fund · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · Tides Foundation · New Venture Fund · America Votes · Resources Legacy Fund · Patagoniaorg · The William & Flora Hewlett Foundation · Amalgamated Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation Inc · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc

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 Western Organization of Resource Councils funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Western Organization of Resource Councils. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24
no gov · 00%6%23%51%90%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
    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 · 0–40%
    typical government reliance, FY20–24
    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 20 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 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Western Organization of Resource Councils’ 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