Skip to content
Central Electric Power Cooperative Inc at a glance

· Public charity

Central Electric Power Cooperative Inc

Central is a generation and transmission (g&t) cooperative supplying power to nineteen member distribution cooperatives in south carolina.

$3.1M
Granted FY2024still arriving
9
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$1.0M
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, FY2019 to 2024.

Community Improvement$26MPublic Benefit$2.5MEnvironment$1.4M
02FY2024 · 9 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2024

  • $50k–250k5 grants · $772k
  • $250k+4 grants · $2.3M
$200,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$559M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
COASTAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC$1,000,000
YORK ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC$580,000
LYNCHES RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC$470,000
SANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC$280,000
BLACK RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVEINC$200,000
TRI-COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATICE INC$187,199
LITTLE RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC$185,000
HORRY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC$100,000
BERKELEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC$100,000
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 (FY19–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 21%, against an area that typically sits at 15%. 96% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 15%YORK ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $580k → 8%BERKELEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $100k → 9%TRI-COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATICE INC: $187k → 15%BLUE RIDGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $647k → 16%FAIRFIELD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1.6M → 16%LITTLE RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $409k → 17%PALMETTO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $25k → 17%NEWBERRY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE: $1.5M → 17%LAURENS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $502k → 18%LYNCHES RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $470k → 20%COASTAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1.0M → 20%PEE DEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $2.0M → 21%SANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1.1M → 26%EDISTO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $2.0M → 28%MARLBORO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $310k → 29%YORK ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $59k → 8%BERKELEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $50k → 9%TRI-COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $30k → 15%BLUE RIDGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $500k → 16%FAIRFIELD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1.4M → 16%LITTLE RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $185k → 17%NEWBERRY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE: $650k → 17%LYNCHES RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE: $25k → 20%COASTAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $550k → 20%PEE DEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1.1M → 21%SANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1.0M → 26%EDISTO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $16k → 28%MARLBORO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $30k → 29%YORK ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $55k → 8%TRI-COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $20k → 15%BLUE RIDGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $326k → 16%FAIRFIELD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $30k → 16%LITTLE RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $65k → 17%MARION COUNTY: $200k → 17%COASTAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $28k → 20%PEE DEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $577k → 21%SANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1.0M → 26%MARLBORO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $30k → 29%YORK ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $53k → 8%BLUE RIDGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $75k → 16%NEWBERRY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE: $184k → 17%COASTAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $25k → 20%SANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $900k → 26%YORK ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $33k → 8%NEWBERRY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE: $176k → 17%SANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $280k → 26%YORK ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $22k → 8%SANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $130k → 26%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.

98%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$29M · 17 repeat orgs$727k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +26% since the first grant, against +17% for those funded once.

17 repeat relationships: 9 still active in FY2024, 8 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

17
3

Total granted

$29M
$727k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+26%
+17%

Still filing today

100%
67%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’19’20’21’22’23’24
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

  • SE
    SANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC
    6× · 2019–2024 · $4.5M · revenue +16%
  • FE
    FAIRFIELD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC
    3× · 2019–2023 · $3.0M · revenue +28%
  • BR
    BLACK RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC
    4× · 2021–2024 · $2.8M · revenue +34%

Funded once

  • LE
    LAURENS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC
    one grant, 2020 · $502k · revenue +17%
  • MC
    MARION COUNTY
    one grant, 2019 · $200k
  • PE
    PALMETTO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC
    one grant, 2019 · $25k · revenue +11%
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
Central Georgia Electric Membership Corporation

To provide the best possible electric service to all who desire it wihthin the system's area at a reasonable cost consistent with the highest standards of service.

—
2
Walton Electric Membership Corporation

To provide the best possible electric service to all who desire it within the system's area at a reasonable cost consistent with the highest standards of service.

—
3
Central Electric Cooperative

Make electric energy available to our members at the lowest cost consistent with sound economy and good management.

—
4
Rutherford Electric Membership Corporation

To provide the best possible electric service to all who desire it within the system area at a reasonable cost consistent with the highest standards of service.

—
5
Sawnee Electric Membership Corporation

To provide electric service to all who desire it within the system's service area, as provided by georgia law, lender requirements and other regulatory and industry standards.

—
6
Umatilla Electric Cooperative

Umatilla electric cooperative is a member-owned electric utility that sells energy and other services to improve the quality of life in its service communities.

—
7
Piedmont Electric Membership Corporation

To enhance the quality of life in our communities by empowering and partnering with our members. we strive to create superior value for our members in an ever changing energy environment.

—
8
United Electric Cooperative Inc

Providing affordable electricity to members

Public Benefit
9
Dixie Electric Cooperative

Dixie electric cooperative is committed to safely providing its member- owners with economical and reliable electric power and related services.

—
10
Wake Electric Membership Corporation

Wake electric provides reliable, safe, and affordable energy and related services. wake electric operates as a cooperative business and continually improves its services to meet the needs of our members and enhance their quality of life.…

—
11
Baldwin County Electric Membership Corporation

Rural electric cooperative serving baldwin and monroe counties in alabama.

—
12
Jackson Electric Membership Corporation

To provide the best possible electric service to all who desire it within the system area at a reasonable cost consistent with the highest standards of service.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Broad River Electric Cooperative Inc; the most unlike its peers is Santee Electric Cooperative 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

19 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. 19 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.

0
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
0
Early backer (in before they grew)
19/19
Grantees still filing
18/19
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $4,455,000 · OtherSANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INCPEE DEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $3,640,490 · OtherPEE DEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INCFAIRFIELD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $3,030,000 · OtherFAIRFIELD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INCBLACK RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $2,750,000 · OtherBLACK RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INCAIKEN ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $2,591,000 · OtherAIKEN ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INCNEWBERRY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $2,509,950 · OtherNEWBERRY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INCBROAD RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1,666,000 · OtherBROAD RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INCCOASTAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1,608,037 · OtherCOASTAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INCBLUE RIDGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1,548,856 · OtherBLUE RIDGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC+8 more: $2,957,764 · Other+8 moreEDISTO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $2,049,150 · Public BenefitEDISTO ELE…LAURENS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $502,265 · Public BenefitLAURENS EL…HORRY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $130,000 · Public Benefit
Other$26,757,097Public Benefit$2,681,415

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

25%50%75%100%$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSANTEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $4,455,000 over 6y, 0.8% of budgetPEE DEE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $3,640,490 over 4y, 2.6% of budgetFAIRFIELD ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $3,030,000 over 3y, 1.9% of budgetBLACK RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $2,750,000 over 4y, 1.8% of budgetAIKEN ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $2,591,000 over 4y, 1.1% of budgetNEWBERRY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $2,509,950 over 4y, 3.1% of budgetEDISTO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $2,049,150 over 2y, 4.1% of budgetBROAD RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1,666,000 over 4y, 2.2% of budgetCOASTAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1,608,037 over 5y, 3.3% of budgetBLUE RIDGE ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $1,548,856 over 4y, 0.4% of budgetYORK ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $801,649 over 6y, 0.4% of budgetLITTLE RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $658,916 over 3y, 1.4% of budgetLYNCHES RIVER ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $505,000 over 3y, 0.7% of budgetLAURENS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $502,265 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetMARLBORO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $370,000 over 3y, 0.4% of budgetTRI-COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $247,199 over 4y, 0.3% of budgetBERKELEY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $150,000 over 2y, 0.0% of budgetHORRY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $130,000 over 2y, 0.1% of budgetPALMETTO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE INC: $25,000 over 1y, 0.0% 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 set of overlaps that mostly run through this funder rather than between each other.

Palmetto Economic Dev…
Palmetto Economic Development Corp Dba South Carolina Power TeamSC15.8× affinity5 shared granteesties to 0 of 0Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Palmetto Economic Development Corp Dba South Carolina Power Team

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 Central Electric Power Cooperative Inc funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Central Electric Power Cooperative Inc. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%0%1%3%5%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
    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.

    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 Central Electric Power Cooperative’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