How much does Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities give?

Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities reported 10 itemized grants totaling $465,485, out of $494,510 in total grant expense reported on the return in its FY2019 IRS filing. It funded between 9 and 10 organizations a year over FY2017 to FY2019.

What does Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities fund?

By grant dollars over FY2017 to FY2019, its largest causes are Employment (88%), Youth Development (12%).

Who are Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities's largest grantees?

By total granted over FY2017 to FY2019: Boys & Girls Clubs of Central Minnesota ($366k), Boys and Girls Club of Rochester ($240k), Boys' Club of Duluth ($192k).

Does Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities fund new organizations?

In FY2019, 10% of the organizations it funded were first-time grantees.

Which funders back the same organizations as Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities?

Its strongest co-funders, measured against what their size predicts, include Boys & Girls Clubs of America (Group Return), Boys & Girls Clubs of America, Otto Bremer Trust.

Where is Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities based?

Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities is based in MN.

Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities

Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities at a glance Mostly funded, not a grantmaker: see who funds it →

· Public charity

Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities

To enable young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens.

$495k

Granted FY2019

Grants FY2019

States reached

$100k

Largest

01What it funds

01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2019.

Employment$1.3MYouth Development$186k

02FY2019 · 10 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured

The 10 grants below total $465,485, the rows itemized in this filing. The $494,510 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $29,025 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 · FY2019

$10k–50k7 grants · $226k
$50k–250k3 grants · $240k

$41,092

Median grant

States reached

$16M

Total assets

Largest grants
Recipient	Amount
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF CENTRAL MN	$99,627
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF ROCHESTER	$80,737
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE NORTHLAND	$59,532
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE NORTH STAR	$45,475
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF BEMIDJI	$41,092
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF LEECH LAKE	$36,289
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF THE WHITE EARTH RESERVATION	$35,730
RED LAKE NATION BOYS & GIRLS CLUB	$29,242
BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OF DETROIT LAKES	$24,948
MN ALLIANCE OF BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB	$12,813

02The need

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 (FY17–19) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 9%. 69% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

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.

97%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.

$1.5M · 9 repeat orgs$43k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +18% since the first grant, against -28% for those funded once.

9 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2019, 0 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2019 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

Total granted

$1.5M

$30k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+18%

-28%

Still filing today

78%

100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2019, 97% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $13k went to new ones.

RenewedFirst-time

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

BG
BOYS & GIRLS CLUBS OF CENTRAL MINNESOTA
3× · 2017–2019 · $366k · revenue +44%
BA
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF ROCHESTER
3× · 2017–2019 · $240k · revenue +18%
BC
BOYS' CLUB OF DULUTH
3× · 2017–2019 · $192k · revenue +13%

Funded once

BA
BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB OF THE TWIN CITIES FOUNDATION
one grant, 2017 · $30k · revenue -28%

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.

Boys Girls Club

—

Boys and Girls Club of Augusta/Waynesboro

To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring and responsible citizens.

Youth Development

Boys and Girls Clubs of Siouxland Inc

To inspire and enable all young people to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens.

Youth Development

Boys & Girls Clubs of the Northwoods Inc

To empower all youth, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, and responsible citizens.

Youth Development

Boys & Girls Clubs of Southwest Virginia Inc

To enable and inspire all young people, ages five to eighteen, especially those who need us most, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible, and caring citizens.

Youth Development

Boys & Girls Club of Bloomfield

The corporation provides youth with after school activities to promote education, sports and recreation.

—

Boys & Girls Club of the Missouri River Area

To enable all young people, especially those who need them most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens.

Youth Development

Boys & Girls Clubs of the San Gorgonio Pass

To inspire and enable all young people especially those in need to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens.

Education

Boys & Girls Clubs of North Central Georgia

To inspire and enable all young people, especially those who need it most, to realize their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens.

Youth Development

Boys & Girls Club of Northwest Colo

The mission of the clubs is to enable and inspire the youth of our area to reach their full potential as productive, responsible and caring citizens. the clubs offers core programs designed to engage youth with peers and caring adults to…

Youth Development

Boys & Girls Club of Greater Holland

Programs for local youth

Youth Development

Boys and Girls Club of Glacier Country

To enable all young people, especially those who need us most, to reach their full potential as productive, caring, responsible citizens.

Youth Development

How this is measured

The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Boys & Girls Club of the North Star; the most unlike its peers is Boys and Girls Club of Rochester. 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

8 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. 8 of the 11 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.

Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)

Early backer (in before they grew)

8/8

Grantees still filing

5/8

Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Youth Development$1,017,562Other$483,592

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

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.

Boys & Girls Clubs of America (Group Return)GA21.8× affinity8 shared granteesties to 6 of 6Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Boys & Girls Clubs of America (Group Return) · Boys & Girls Clubs of America · Otto Bremer Trust · Saint Paul & Minnesota Foundation · 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 Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities. Bigger dots raise more.

2023

’20’21’22’23’24’25

no gov moneyreceives it· size = income

0get no government money at all

7report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)

0rely on government for over half their income

⤢ axis zoomed · 0–5%

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.

Play a game based on Boys and Girls Clubs of the Twin Cities’ 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