Skip to content
Yvonne Mansfield Animal Welfare Fund at a glance

· Private foundation

Yvonne Mansfield Animal Welfare Fund

Its FY2025 filing reports that it accepted unsolicited grant applications.

$34k
Granted FY2025still arriving
11
Grants FY2025still arriving
2
States reached
$8k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
01What it funds
0197% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2018 to 2025.

Animals$255kEducation$10kOther$0
02FY2025 · 11 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

$3,000
Median grant
2
States reached
$727k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
YELLOWSTONE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER$8,000
MONTANA RAPTOR CONSERVATION CENTER$4,000
Individual grant recipient$3,878
Individual grant recipient$3,500
EASTERN MONTANA HUMANE SOCIETY$3,500
SCIENCE AND CONSERVATION CENTER$3,000
PRAIRIE SONG RESCUE$2,500
Individual grant recipient$2,000
BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL HOSPITAL$1,500
Individual grant recipient$1,073
VARIOUS INDIVIDUAL BELOW 500$842
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 (FY18–25) land where the poverty rate runs at 10%, against an area that typically sits at 10%. 16% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants skew toward lower-need ZIPs.

area typical 10%BEARTOOTH HUMANE ALLIANCE: $3k → 9%YELLOWSTONE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER: $8k → 9%EASTERN MONTANA HUMANE SOCIETY: $4k → 10%PRAIRIE SONG RESCUE: $3k → 10%RIMROCK HUMANE SOCIETY: $5k → 16%RVETS MONTANA DIVISION: $4k → 10%CIRCLE2 RESCUE: $6k → 7%HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE US (BILLINGS): $5k → 9%EASTERN MONTANA HUMANE SOCIETY: $2k → 10%STAFFORD ANIMAL SHELTER: $5k → 10%YELLOWSTONE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER: $5k → 9%FALLON COUNTY VETERINARY SERVICE: $2k → 10%STAFFORD ANIMAL SHELTER: $3k → 10%YELLOWSTONE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER: $5k → 9%FALLON COUNTY VETERINARY SERVICE: $2k → 10%ALPINE VETERINARY SERVICE: $3k → 9%FALLON COUNTY VETERINARY SERVICE: $2k → 10%YELLOWSTONE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER: $3k → 9%MOORE LANE VETERINARY HOSPITAL: $3k → 9%BILLINGS VETERINARY SERVICE: $3k → 9%ALPINE VETERINARY SERVICE: $3k → 9%YELLOWSTONE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER: $2k → 9%MICHAEL KENNARD: $2k → 9%ALPINE VETERINARY SERVICE: $2k → 9%MOORE LANE VETERINARY HOSPITAL: $2k → 9%BILLINGS VETERINARY SERVICE: $2k → 9%ANIMAL CLINIC OF BILLINGS: $15k → 9%VET TO GO: $8k → 9%ANIMAL CLINIC OF BILLINGS: $5k → 9%ROCKY MOUNTAIN COLLEGE: $5k → 9%ROCKY MOUNTAIN COLLEGE: $5k → 9%VET TO GO: $4k → 9%VET TO GO: $2k → 9%VET TO GO: $2k → 9%VET TO GO: $2k → 9%GRANITE PEAK VETERINARY HOSPITAL: $2k → 9%MONTANA EQUINE: $2k → 9%SCIENCE AND CONSERVATION CENTER: $5k → 9%ZOO MONTANA: $5k → 9%SAVAGE CAT RESCUE INC: $4k → 9%SCIENCE AND CONSERVATION CENTER: $4k → 9%SCIENCE AND CONSERVATION CENTER: $4k → 9%SCIENCE AND CONSERVATION CENTER: $3k → 9%CIRCLE2 RESCUE: $10k → 9%CIRCLE2 RESCUE: $5k → 9%LAST CHANCE CAT SANCTUARY: $5k → 9%HOLISTIC VETERINARY CARE: $4k → 9%BEST FRIENDS ANIMAL HOSPITAL: $2k → 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.

83%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$225k · 21 repeat orgs$46k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +29% since the first grant, against +13% for those funded once.

21 repeat relationships: 6 still active in FY2025, 15 since wound down; 5 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

21
17

Total granted

$225k
$36k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+29%
+13%

Still filing today

43%
24%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 71% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $10k went to new ones.

50%100%’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’18’19’20’21’22’23’24’25
AnimalsEnvironmentEducationOther
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

  • MR
    MONTANA RAPTOR CONSERVATION CENTER INC
    8× · 2018–2025 · $31k · revenue +30%
  • YV
    YELLOWSTONE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER
    5× · 2020–2025 · $23k · revenue +303%
  • SM
    Spay Montana
    4× · 2018–2024 · $19k · revenue +70%

Funded once

  • LC
    LAST CHANCE CAT SANCTUARY
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
  • HS
    HUMANE SOCIETY OF THE US (BILLINGS)
    one grant, 2020 · $5k
  • RH
    RIMROCK HUMANE SOCIETYgraduated
    one grant, 2018 · $5k · revenue +276%
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
Beaverhead Animal Shelter

The mission is to protect and care for homeless animals in the Dillon and Beaverhead county area.

Animals
2
Platte Ranch Forever Home Sanctuary
Animals
3
Animal Rescue of the Rockies

Animal Care and Adoption - ARR's mission is to save the lives of homeless and abandoned dogs and cats. Our goal is reaching a no-kill society in the United States.

Animals
4
2nd Chance Ranch and Rescue

Sanctuary for abused or abandoned animals

Animals
5
Mountain View Animal Rescue

Rescue of abused or abandoned animals

Animals
6
Blackfoot Animal Shelter and Rescue

Humanely shelter and successfully reunite pets and their owners. Support Responsible pet care, including spray and neuter programs, educate, rescue and support community safety.

Animals
7
Pom and the Hound Animal Refuge

Animal Welfare

—
8
Harmony Animal Rescue Clinic

Helping animal rescue organizations save more lives by providing timely, low-cost veterinary care is the mission of harmony animal rescue clinic.

Animals
9
Happy Tails Animal Sanctuary
Animals
10
From the Heart Animal Sanctuary
Animals
11
Mountain Pet Rescue

Improving the lives of pets in need by providing rescue, foster care, education, training support, and adoption into safe loving homes.

Animals
12
Raskels Rescue
Animals
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Yellowstone Valley Animal Shelter; the most unlike its peers is Rocky Mountain College. 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

14 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. 14 of the 43 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)
4
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
8/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

YELLOWSTONE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER: $23,000 · AnimalsYELLOWSTONE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTERCIRCLE 2 RESCUE: $20,500 · AnimalsCIRCLE 2 RESCUESpay Montana: $18,500 · AnimalsSpay MontanaTHE SCIENCE AND CONSERVATION CENTER INC: $15,355 · AnimalsTHE SCIENCE AND CONSERVATION CENTER INCANGEL HORSES INC: $13,000 · AnimalsANGEL HORSES INCSTAFFORD ANIMAL SHELTER: $8,500 · AnimalsSTAFFORD ANIMAL SHELTEREASTERN MONTANA HUMANE SOCIETY: $5,500 · AnimalsRIMROCK HUMANE SOCIETY: $5,000 · AnimalsZooMontana Inc: $5,000 · Animals+3 more: $5,300 · AnimalsANIMAL CLINIC OF BILLINGS: $22,014 · OtherANIMAL CLINIC OF BILLINGSIndividual grant recipient: $19,601 · OtherIndividual grant recipientCIRCLE 2 RESCUE: $7,500 · OtherCIRCLE 2 RESCUEALPINE VETERINARY SERVICE: $7,200 · OtherALPINE VETERINARY SERVICELAST CHANCE CAT SANCTUARY: $5,000 · OtherHUMANE SOCIETY OF THE US (BILLINGS): $5,000 · OtherHOLISTIC VETERINARY CARE: $4,904 · OtherFALLON COUNTY VETERINARY SERVICE: $4,500 · OtherMOORE LANE VETERINARY HOSPITAL: $4,416 · OtherBILLINGS VETERINARY SERVICE: $4,117 · OtherSAVAGE CAT RESCUE INC: $4,000 · Other+18 more: $22,719 · Other+18 moreMONTANA RAPTOR CONSERVATION CENTER INC: $30,600 · EnvironmentMONTANA RAPT…ROCKY MOUNTAIN COLLEGE: $10,000 · Education
Animals$119,655Other$110,971Environment$30,600Education$10,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$10k$100k$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetMONTANA RAPTOR CONSERVATION CENTER INC: $30,600 over 8y, 2.1% of budgetYELLOWSTONE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER: $23,000 over 5y, 0.4% of budgetCIRCLE 2 RESCUE: $20,500 over 3y, 5.4% of budgetSpay Montana: $18,500 over 4y, 2.3% of budgetTHE SCIENCE AND CONSERVATION CENTER INC: $15,355 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetANGEL HORSES INC: $13,000 over 3y, 3.5% of budgetROCKY MOUNTAIN COLLEGE: $10,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetSTAFFORD ANIMAL SHELTER: $8,500 over 3y, 0.6% of budgetEASTERN MONTANA HUMANE SOCIETY: $5,500 over 3y, 36% of budgetRIMROCK HUMANE SOCIETY: $5,000 over 1y, 5.9% of budgetZooMontana Inc: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetBEARTOOTH HUMANE ALLIANCE: $2,500 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetINSIDE VOICE: $300 over 1y, 0.4% 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 MONTANA RAPTOR CONSERVATION CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds YELLOWSTONE VALLEY ANIMAL SHELTER ↗
  • Who funds CIRCLE 2 RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds Spay Montana ↗
  • Who funds THE SCIENCE AND CONSERVATION CENTER INC ↗
  • Who funds ANGEL HORSES INC ↗
  • Who funds ROCKY MOUNTAIN COLLEGE ↗
  • Who funds STAFFORD ANIMAL SHELTER ↗
  • Who funds EASTERN MONTANA HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds RIMROCK HUMANE SOCIETY ↗
  • Who funds ZooMontana Inc ↗
  • Who funds PRAIRIE SONG RESCUE ↗
  • Who funds BEARTOOTH HUMANE ALLIANCE ↗

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.

First Interstate Banc…Montana Community Fou…Donald & Carol Robert…Network for GoodDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
First Interstate BancSystem Foundation IncMT16.6× affinity6 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: First Interstate BancSystem Foundation Inc · Montana Community Foundation Inc · Donald & Carol Roberts Foundation in Memory of Virginia K Weston Inc · Network for Good · Donor Advised Charitable Giving Inc · Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund · Amazonsmile Foundation

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 Yvonne Mansfield Animal Welfare Fund funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Yvonne Mansfield Animal Welfare Fund. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%3%5%8%10%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    2report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    ⤢ axis zoomed · 0–10%
    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.
    05Through Plinth

    Warm introductions · Powered by PlinthPlus

    How do I get to Yvonne Mansfield Animal Welfare Fund?

    Find your warmest path to Yvonne Mansfield Animal Welfare Fund 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 from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 43 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Yvonne Mansfield Animal Welfare’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