Skip to content
Community Services of Moses Lake at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Community Services of Moses Lake

Operation of food bank

$761k
Granted FY2024still arriving
24
Grants FY2024still arriving
1
States reached
$251k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
05Through PlinthRead
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 2024.

Food & Nutrition$3.6MHuman Services$249kCommunity Improvement$9k
02FY2024 · 24 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 24 grants below total $685,394, the rows itemized in this filing. The $760,895 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $75,501 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 · FY2024

  • Under $10k7 grants · $40k
  • $10k–50k15 grants · $337k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $57k
  • $250k+1 grant · $251k
$17,609
Median grant
1
States reached
$9.4M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
TRICITIES FOOD BANK$250,989
OTHELLO FOOD BANK$57,043
JUBILEE MINISTRY OF PROSSER$43,020
SUNRISE OUTREACH CENTER$40,148
YAKIMA ROTARY FOOD BANK$32,560
ST VINCENT CENTER$31,575
ZILLAH FOOD BANK$24,974
MATTAWA FOOD BANK$23,161
QUINCY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK$23,092
GRANDVIEW SDA FOOD BANK$21,317
GRANGER FOOD BANK$18,782
GRAND COULEE AREA CARE & SHARE$17,609
SOAP LAKE FOOD BANK$14,479
YAKIMA SDA FOOD BANK$12,626
ST MICHAELS PANTRY$12,035
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 (FY17–24) land where the poverty rate runs at 13%, against an area that typically sits at 13%. 51% of its dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Its grants spread fairly evenly across need levels.

area typical 13%GRAND COULEE AREA CARE & SHARE: $18k → 9%TRICITIES FOOD BANK: $251k → 11%SOAP LAKE FOOD BANK: $32k → 14%OTHELLO FOOD BANK: $57k → 15%ST MICHAELS PANTRY: $16k → 17%GRAND COULEE AREA CARE & SHARE: $18k → 9%TRI-CITIES FOOD BANK: $127k → 11%SOAP LAKE FOOD BANK: $23k → 14%OTHELLO FOOD BANK: $25k → 15%TRI-CITIES FOOD BANK: $112k → 11%SOAP LAKE FOOD BANK: $16k → 14%OTHELLO FOOD BANK: $22k → 15%TRI-CITIES FOOD BANK: $109k → 11%OTHELLO FOOD BANK: $15k → 15%TRI-CITIES FOOD BANK: $88k → 11%TRI-CITIES FOOD BANK: $77k → 11%TRI-CITIES FOOD BANK: $50k → 11%TRI-CITIES FOOD BANK: $31k → 11%MATTAWA FOOD BANK: $25k → 14%JUBILEE MINISTRY OF PROSSER: $67k → 11%MATTAWA FOOD BANK: $23k → 14%JUBILEE MINISTRY OF PROSSER: $43k → 11%MATTAWA FOOD BANK: $21k → 14%JUBILEE MINISTRY OF PROSSER: $32k → 11%GRANDVIEW SDA FOOD BANK: $29k → 11%GRANDVIEW SDA FOOD BANK: $23k → 11%GRANDVIEW SDA FOOD BANK: $21k → 11%JUBILEE MINISTRY OF PROSSER: $17k → 11%EPHRATA CONSOLIDATED FOOD BANK: $16k → 14%ST VINCENT CENTER: $32k → 17%ST VINCENT CENTER: $20k → 17%ROYAL CITY FOOD BANK: $16k → 14%GRANGER FOOD BANK: $19k → 17%ROYAL CITY FOOD BANK: $15k → 14%QUINCY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $30k → 14%SELAH FOOD BANK: $16k → 17%QUINCY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $23k → 14%QUINCY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $21k → 14%TOPPENISH COMMUNITY CHEST: $22k → 17%TOPPENISH COMMUNITY CHEST: $21k → 17%TOPPENISH COMMUNITY CHEST: $15k → 17%TOPPENISH COMMUNITY CHEST: $15k → 17%YAKIMA SDA FOOD BANK: $46k → 17%YAKIMA SDA FOOD BANK: $28k → 17%YAKIMA SDA FOOD BANK: $21k → 17%ZILLAH FOOD BANK: $25k → 17%ZILLAH FOOD BANK: $19k → 17%ZILLAH FOOD BANK: $17k → 17%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.
$3.8M · 27 repeat orgs$64k to everyone else

27 repeat relationships: 23 still active in FY2024, 4 since wound down; 1 grantees were first funded in FY2024 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

27
6

Total granted

$3.8M
$55k

Still filing today

48%
0%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2024, 99% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $9k 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
Food & NutritionHousing & ShelterReligionCommunity ImprovementOther
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

  • TF
    TRI-CITIES FOOD BANK
    8× · 2017–2024 · $846k · revenue +63%
  • SO
    SUNRISE OUTREACH CENTER OF YAKIMA
    8× · 2017–2024 · $524k · revenue +533%
  • YR
    Yakima Rotary Food Bank
    8× · 2017–2024 · $213k · revenue +69%

Funded once

  • SA
    Salvation Army Las Vegas Corp
    one grant, 2017 · $26k
  • SM
    ST MICHAELS PANTRY
    one grant, 2017 · $9k
  • 7D
    7TH DAY ADVENTIST
    one grant, 2017 · $8k
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
Snohomish Community Food Bank

To provide food and services in a caring and dignified manner to neighbors in need

—
2
Tillman County Food Bank Foundation
—
3
Sunshine Bend Community Development Corp

Food bank for needy

Food & Nutrition
4
Asotin County Food Bank Association

Provide food and other necessities to asotin county residents in need.

—
5
Fairview Food Bank

Providing food for those in need.

Food & Nutrition
6
South County Community Food Bank

Providing nutritious food to low income families and individuals in south clatsop county

Food & Nutrition
7
Lake Chelan Food Bank

The mission of Lake Chelan Food Bank is to treat each person we serve with dignity and respect and to provide balanced and varied options that give each person the liberty to meet the specific food needs for themsevles and/or their family.

Food & Nutrition
8
Big Timber Community Food Bank

Area food bank distributions

Food & Nutrition
9
Dickenson County Food Bank

To provide food to the needy residents of Dickenson County Virginia

Food & Nutrition
10
Greater Urbana Area Food Bank Inc

To feed the hungry

Food & Nutrition
11
Foothills Food Bank

The Foothills Food Bank works to ensure access to quality, nutritious food to community members in need, and deliver services with respect and dignity.

—
12
Faith Food Bank

To provide food to the needy

Food & Nutrition
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Zillah Food Bank; the most unlike its peers is Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Yakima. 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, 2017–2026.

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 2026, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 14 of the 34 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.

6
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
14/14
Grantees still filing
12/14
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

Yakima Rotary Food Bank: $212,577 · OtherYakima Rotary Food BankJUBILEE MINISTRY OF PROSSER: $199,344 · OtherJUBILEE MINISTRY OF PROSSERTHE SALVATION ARMY: $193,158 · OtherTHE SALVATION ARMYYAKIMA SDA FOOD BANK: $147,593 · OtherYAKIMA SDA FOOD BANKGRANDVIEW SDA FOOD BANK: $126,854 · OtherGRANDVIEW SDA FOOD BANKCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE OF YAKIMA: $118,586 · OtherCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE OF YAKIMASOAP LAKE FOOD BANK: $113,041 · OtherSOAP LAKE FOOD BANKMATTAWA AREA FOOD BANK: $103,049 · OtherMATTAWA AREA FOOD BANKGRAND COULEE DAM CARE & SHARE FOOD: $83,105 · OtherROYAL CITY FOOD BANK: $78,436 · OtherRITZVILLE MINISTERIAL ASSOCIATION: $67,457 · OtherEPHRATA CONSOLIDATED FOOD BANK: $63,716 · Other+13 more: $325,876 · Other+13 moreTRI-CITIES FOOD BANK: $845,642 · Food & NutritionTRI-CITIES FOOD BANKOTHELLO FOOD BANK: $158,477 · Food & NutritionOTHELLO FOOD BANKQUINCY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $113,704 · Food & NutritionQUINCY COMMUNITY FOOD BANKZILLAH FOOD BANK: $105,659 · Food & NutritionZILLAH FOOD BANKTOPPENISH COMMUNITY CHEST: $99,811 · Food & NutritionTOPPENISH COMMUNITY CHESTGRANGER FOOD BANK: $77,661 · Food & NutritionGRANGER FOOD BANKSUNRISE OUTREACH CENTER OF YAKIMA: $524,210 · Housing & ShelterSUNRISE OUTREAC…BETWEEN THE RIDGES: $72,963 · ReligionRESTORATION COMMUNITY IMPACT: $9,026 · Community Improvement
Other$1,832,792Food & Nutrition$1,400,954Housing & Shelter$524,210Religion$72,963Community Improvement$9,026

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 budgetTRI-CITIES FOOD BANK: $845,642 over 8y, 4.0% of budgetSUNRISE OUTREACH CENTER OF YAKIMA: $524,210 over 8y, 4.3% of budgetYakima Rotary Food Bank: $212,577 over 8y, 1.2% of budgetJUBILEE MINISTRY OF PROSSER: $199,344 over 8y, 37% of budgetOTHELLO FOOD BANK: $158,477 over 8y, 37% of budgetCATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE OF YAKIMA: $118,586 over 8y, 0.1% of budgetQUINCY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK: $113,704 over 7y, 2.7% of budgetSOAP LAKE FOOD BANK: $113,041 over 8y, 33% of budgetZILLAH FOOD BANK: $105,659 over 8y, 11% of budgetTOPPENISH COMMUNITY CHEST: $99,811 over 8y, 37% of budgetGRANGER FOOD BANK: $77,661 over 8y, 6.9% of budgetBETWEEN THE RIDGES: $72,963 over 7y, 51% of budgetEPHRATA CONSOLIDATED FOOD BANK: $63,716 over 8y, 32% 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 TRI-CITIES FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds SUNRISE OUTREACH CENTER OF YAKIMA ↗
  • Who funds Yakima Rotary Food Bank ↗
  • Who funds JUBILEE MINISTRY OF PROSSER ↗
  • Who funds OTHELLO FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF THE DIOCESE OF YAKIMA ↗
  • Who funds QUINCY COMMUNITY FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds SOAP LAKE FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds ZILLAH FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds TOPPENISH COMMUNITY CHEST ↗
  • Who funds GRANGER FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds BETWEEN THE RIDGES ↗
  • Who funds EPHRATA CONSOLIDATED FOOD BANK ↗
  • Who funds RESTORATION COMMUNITY IMPACT ↗

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.

Northwest Harvest EmmSecond Harvest Inland…Lamb Weston Charitabl…United Way of Central…Apple Py FoundationDutch Bros FoundationThe Avista FoundationSeattle FoundationDonor Advised Charita…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Northwest Harvest EmmWA58.3× affinity26 shared granteesties to 10 of 10Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Northwest Harvest Emm · Second Harvest Inland Northwest · Lamb Weston Charitable Foundation · United Way of Central Washington · Apple Py Foundation · Dutch Bros Foundation · The Avista Foundation · Seattle 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 Community Services of Moses Lake funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Community Services of Moses Lake. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%4%15%34%60%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
    5report 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 Community Services of Moses Lake?

    Find your warmest path to Community Services of Moses Lake 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 34 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 Community Services of Moses Lake’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