Skip to content
Plinth
Foundation DossiersMostly funded, not a grantmaker — see who funds it →
Plinth

· Public charity

Western Organization of Resource Councils Education Project

To support the charitable and educational activities (within the meaning of the internal revenue code section 501(c)(3)) of the western organization of resource councils (worc) a publicly suppported section 501 (c)(4) organization, as permitted by the treasury.

$6.3M
Granted FY2024still arriving
27
Grants FY2024still arriving
12
States reached
$2.9M
Largest
01What you fundRead
02The needRead
03Your edgeRead
04Your fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What you fund
01

What you funded, over time

By grantee IRS cause code (NTEE).

A cause breakdown isn’t shown here: 52% of WESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS EDUCATION PROJECT’s grantee dollars fall outside its nine largest cause areas, whether because the recipient carries no IRS cause code or because its cause sits in the long tail. A chart would be mostly one residual band and misrepresent the portfolio.

02FY2024 · 27 grants

Where the money goes

Your grants by size, and where they go.

The 27 grants below total $5,816,842 — the rows itemised in this filing. The $6,309,683 headline is the total grant expense reported on the return, so the remaining $492,841 is giving the schedule does not break out: grants under the $5,000 itemisation floor, grants to individuals, and grants reported on other schedules. Every figure below describes the itemised rows only.

By grant size · FY2024

  • Under $10k2 grants · $16k
  • $10k–50k8 grants · $178k
  • $50k–250k13 grants · $1.5M
  • $250k+4 grants · $4.1M
$80,000
Median grant
12
States reached
$7.2M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
WESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS$2,949,164
NORTH DAKOTA NATIVE VOTE$552,178
NORTHERN PLAINS RESOURCE COUNCIL$341,500
MIDDLE FORK STRATEGIES$250,000
POWDER RIVER BASIN RESOURCE COUNCIL$200,000
DAKOTA RESOURCE COUNCIL$177,500
OREGON RURAL ACTION$177,000
WESTERN COLORADO ALLIANCE$172,000
MONTANA WOMEN VOTE$142,000
DAKOTA RURAL ACTION$120,000
ORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT FUND$100,000
BIG SKY FIFTY FIVE PLUS$100,000
WESTERN NATIVE VOICE EP$99,500
IDAHO ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCIL$80,000
CLEAN UP THE RIVER ENVIRONMENT$60,500
02The need
03

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.

show:

Your human-services grants (FY22–22, $150k) land where the poverty rate runs at 25%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of your grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%One Voice Inc: $150k → 25%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount

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

AK
ID
MT
ND
MN
WI
NY
OR
WY
SD
CA
CO
MO
KY
WV
VA
NM
KS
TN
NC
DC
AL
GA

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.

03Your edge
repeat funding

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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations you’ve funded before.
$37M · 31 repeat orgs$1.2M to everyone else

31 repeat relationships — 24 still active in FY2024, 7 since wound down; 3 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

31
14

Total granted

$37M
$1.1M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+36%
+58%

Still filing today

94%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 98% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $116k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’22’23’24
EnvironmentCommunity ImprovementPublic BenefitCivil RightsHealthHuman ServicesOther

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

  • WO
    WESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS
    8× · 2017–2024 · $17M · revenue +242% · 98% of their budget
  • NP
    NORTHERN PLAINS RESOURCE COUNCIL
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.8M · revenue +66% · 28% of their budget
  • DR
    DAKOTA RESOURCE COUNCIL
    8× · 2017–2024 · $2.2M · revenue +181% · 71% of their budget

Funded once

  • KC
    KENTUCKY COALITION INC
    one grant, 2022 · $205k · revenue -48%
  • GC
    GEORGIA CONSERVATION VOTERS ED FUNDgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $150k · revenue +74%
  • PJ
    PEOPLE'S JUSTICE COUNCILgraduated
    one grant, 2022 · $150k · revenue +372%

Repeat = funded in two or more distinct years; growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Your field

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.

1
Montana Conservation Voters Inc

Montana conservation voters protects our clean air, clean water, public lands and democracy by supporting leaders who fight for these rights and by holding accountable leaders who do not.

—
2
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…

—
3
Great Basin Resource Watch

Natural resource protection: Protected communities and the environment from the negative impacts of mineral development; provided support to communities impacted by mining

Environment
4
Cottonwood Environmental Law Center

Organization is dedicated to protecting the people, forests, water and wildlife in the west

Environment
5
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
6
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.

—
7
Montana Environmental Information Center

MEIC's mission is to protect and restore Montana's clean and healthful natural environment.

Environment
8
Working Montanans

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

—
9
Park County Environmental Council

PCEC works with our community to safeguard the land, water, wildlife, and people of Yellowstone's northern gateway through grassroots organizing and community advocacy.

Environment
10
Public Land Water Access Association

The organization's mission is to maintain, restore, and perpetuate public access to the boundaries of all Montana's public lands and waters.

—
11
Boulder Watershed Collective

The Boulder Watershed Collective is a 501c3 non-profit stakeholder-driven organization established to address forested watershed health,resiliency and stewardship. We have three program areas: ClimateAdaptation and Resilience Watershed…

Environment
12
Montana Weed Control Association Inc

Strengthen and support noxious weed management

Environment

For reference, the grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Northern Plains Resource Council and the most unlike its peers is People's Justice Council. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.

Your grantees are a median of 26 years old; the field is 19. You back the established end — and your money leans older still.

THE FIELDby orgYOUR GRANTEESby number18%0%<5yr12%12%5–10yr21%30%10–20yr16%15%20–35yr19%39%35–55yr15%3%55yr+
THE FIELDby orgYOUR MONEYby value18%0%<5yr12%6%5–10yr21%8%10–20yr16%11%20–35yr19%76%35–55yr15%0%55yr+

The field is 18% startups (under 5 years old) — 0% of your grantees by number, and just 0% of your money.

Closures · last 5 years

The orgs you fund almost never close — 2% lost their exemption, against 8% of the field you don’t fund.

orgs you fund
2%1/48
the rest of the field
8%
819/9,924

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.

04the grantee network

47 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. 47 of the 48 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.

15
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
20
Early backer (in before they grew)
46/47
Grantees still filing
31/47
Grew since you first funded

Where your money sits — by cause, then by grantee

WESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS — $17,479,760 · OtherWESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILSWESTERN NATIVE VOICE EDUCATION PROJECT — $975,305 · OtherOREGON RURAL ACTION — $740,900 · Other+9 more — $996,520 · OtherPOWDER RIVER BASIN RESOURCE COUNCIL — $2,288,800 · EnvironmentPOWDER RIVER BASIN RE…DAKOTA RESOURCE COUNCIL — $2,183,000 · EnvironmentDAKOTA RESOURCE COUNC…IDAHO ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUN — $1,019,950 · EnvironmentIDAHO ORGANIZATION OF…CLEAN UP THE RIVER ENVIRONMENT — $301,000 · EnvironmentRenew Missouri Advocates — $292,000 · EnvironmentAPPALACHIAN VOICES — $265,500 · Environment+10 more — $704,950 · Environment+10 moreNORTHERN PLAINS RESOURCE COUNCIL — $2,814,583 · Community ImprovementNORTHERN PLAINS …WESTERN COLORADO ALLIANCE — $1,957,900 · Community ImprovementWESTERN COLORADO…MOUNTAIN ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INC — $260,500 · Community ImprovementA BETTER BIG SKY — $250,025 · Community Improvement+2 more — $81,000 · Community ImprovementNORTH DAKOTA NATIVE VOTE — $1,414,581 · Civil RightsCATALYST MONTANA — $382,100 · Civil RightsORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT FUND INC — $100,000 · Civil RightsACLU OF MONTANA FOUNDATION INC — $87,000 · Civil Rights+1 more — $55,000 · Civil RightsBIG SKY FIFTY FIVE PLUS — $840,950 · Public BenefitKENTUCKY COALITION INC — $204,500 · Public BenefitCenter for Common Ground — $125,000 · Public BenefitNEO Philanthropy Inc — $75,000 · Public Benefit+2 more — $35,960 · Public BenefitDakota Rural Action — $1,252,600 · EducationMIDDLE FORK STRATEGIES INC — $355,000 · Human ServicesONE VOICE INC — $150,000 · Human Services
Other$20,192,485Environment$7,055,200Community Improvement$5,364,008Civil Rights$2,038,681Public Benefit$1,281,410Education$1,252,600Human Services$505,000

Each org by its size and your share of it — top-left is where you’re load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$100k$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ your share of their budgetWESTERN ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUNCILS — $17,479,760 over 8y, 98% of budgetNORTHERN PLAINS RESOURCE COUNCIL — $2,814,583 over 8y, 28% of budgetPOWDER RIVER BASIN RESOURCE COUNCIL — $2,288,800 over 8y, 60% of budgetDAKOTA RESOURCE COUNCIL — $2,183,000 over 8y, 71% of budgetWESTERN COLORADO ALLIANCE — $1,957,900 over 8y, 45% of budgetNORTH DAKOTA NATIVE VOTE — $1,414,581 over 5y, 38% of budgetDakota Rural Action — $1,252,600 over 8y, 32% of budgetIDAHO ORGANIZATION OF RESOURCE COUN — $1,019,950 over 8y, 84% of budgetWESTERN NATIVE VOICE EDUCATION PROJECT — $975,305 over 7y, 12% of budgetBIG SKY FIFTY FIVE PLUS — $840,950 over 7y, 78% of budgetFORWARD MT FOUNDATION — $404,020 over 7y, 13% of budgetCATALYST MONTANA — $382,100 over 6y, 5.2% of budgetMIDDLE FORK STRATEGIES INC — $355,000 over 2y, 20% of budgetCLEAN UP THE RIVER ENVIRONMENT — $301,000 over 3y, 17% of budgetRenew Missouri Advocates — $292,000 over 3y, 28% of budgetMONTANA PUBLIC INTEREST RESEARCH GROUP — $279,850 over 7y, 44% of budgetAPPALACHIAN VOICES — $265,500 over 3y, 4.3% of budgetMOUNTAIN ASSOCIATION FOR COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT INC — $260,500 over 3y, 2.5% of budgetA BETTER BIG SKY — $250,025 over 4y, 32% of budgetKENTUCKY COALITION INC — $204,500 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetMONTANA CONSERVATION VOTERS EDUCATION FUND — $198,650 over 5y, 16% of budgetMONTANA WILDERNESS ASSOCIATION — $154,300 over 5y, 2.0% of budgetGEORGIA CONSERVATION VOTERS ED FUND — $150,000 over 1y, 10% of budgetONE VOICE INC — $150,000 over 1y, 36% of budgetCenter for Common Ground — $125,000 over 1y, 4.0% of budgetORGANIZING EMPOWERMENT FUND INC — $100,000 over 1y, 1.4% of budgetIntermountain Planned Parenthood — $91,150 over 4y, 0.6% of budgetACLU OF MONTANA FOUNDATION INC — $87,000 over 2y, 4.6% of budgetNATIVE MOVEMENT — $75,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetNEO Philanthropy Inc — $75,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetMontanans Organized for Education — $67,000 over 2y, 90% of budgetWISCONSIN VOICES INC — $55,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetMONTANA FEDERATION OF PUBLIC EMPLOYEES — $49,800 over 2y, 0.5% of budgetMONTANA WILDLIFE FEDERATION — $40,000 over 1y, 4.3% of budgetMONTANA BUDGET AND POLICY CENTER — $29,300 over 3y, 0.8% of budgetAMERICAN AGRICULTURAL MOVEMENT INC — $25,500 over 3y, 56% of budgetSOUTHWEST RESEARCH & INFORMATION CENTER — $24,000 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetMONTANA STATE AFL-CIO — $15,200 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetWILD MONTANA ACTION FUND — $10,000 over 1y, 8.5% of budgetGreenaction for Health and Environmental Justice — $8,000 over 1y, 1.3% of budgetHONOR THE EARTH — $8,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetEarthworks — $6,660 over 1y, 0.1% of budget
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.

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.

New Venture FundPatagoniaorgWindward FundWestern Organization …Tides FoundationAll Hands on Deck Net…United States Energy …A Better Big SkyRockefeller Philanthr…The Educational Found…America VotesResources Legacy Fund
New Venture FundDC30.3× affinity15 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: New Venture Fund · Patagoniaorg · Windward Fund · Western Organization of Resource Councils · Tides Foundation · All Hands on Deck Network Inc · United States Energy Foundation · A Better Big Sky · Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors Inc · The Educational Foundation of America · America Votes · Resources Legacy Fund

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 Western Organization of Resource Councils Education Project 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.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%your share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s 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

    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.

    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Western Organization of Resource Councils Education Project?

    Find your warmest path to Western Organization of Resource Councils Education Project 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.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read directly from IRS e-file XML — your own 990/990-PF and the multi-year returns of the 48 grantees we resolved across every year we hold, several hundred filings in all (a different count from the grant rows on the cover, which are one fiscal year)— each linked to its source. Grantee achievements and outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III); we read these as association with sustained funding — the foundation is one of several forces — suppress low-confidence name matches rather than guess, and say so where a figure rests on a single grant or filing. Not everything on this page is a filed figure, and the difference matters. Filed is what you reported on your 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. How we build these →

    Generated from your IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2024, released 2024. Filings run roughly 12–24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    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 camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home
    State money flows
    the interactive map of money crossing state lines