Skip to content
Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City Missouri at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City Missouri

The mission of the edc is to drive economic development and create an environment in which businesses and residents can prosper and grow in kansas city, missouri.

$1.7M
Granted FY2025still arriving
22
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$1.0M
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
0198% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2017 to 2025.

Community Improvement$3.8MArts & Culture$1.6MPublic Benefit$1.1MEducation$1.0MEnvironment$370kPhilanthropy$250kFood & Nutrition$189kHuman Services$20kOther$0
02FY2025 · 22 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 22 grants below total $1,350,000, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,716,748 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $366,748 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 · FY2025

  • Under $10k8 grants · $55k
  • $10k–50k12 grants · $145k
  • $50k–250k1 grant · $150k
  • $250k+1 grant · $1.0M
$11,000
Median grant
1
States reached
$8.0M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
NEGRO LEAGUES BASEBALL MUSEUM INC$1,000,000
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY$150,000
URBAN ON ARMOUR & TROOST$15,000
Individual grant recipient$15,000
CUPINI'S$15,000
Individual grant recipient$13,000
OURHOUSEKC$12,000
KOBI Q$12,000
Individual grant recipient$11,000
THE COMBINE$11,000
NICK AND NINO S PUB$11,000
ODDLY CORRECT LLC$10,000
BUFFALO STATE PIZZA CO$10,000
CAFE OLLAMA LLC$10,000
Individual grant recipient$9,000
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:

Its human-services grants (FY19–21, $68k) land where the poverty rate runs at 15%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%HEART OF AMERICA INDIAN CENTER: $10k → 15%KC DIGITAL DRIVE: $6k → 15%KC DIGITAL DRIVE: $6k → 15%DOWNTOWN KANSAS CITY CIVIC VENTURES: $35k → 15%THELMA'S KITCHEN: $10k → 15%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.

72%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$5.6M · 7 repeat orgs$2.2M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +51% since the first grant, against +36% for those funded once.

7 repeat relationships: 1 still active in FY2025, 6 since wound down; 20 grantees were first funded in FY2025 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

7
25

Total granted

$5.6M
$2.0M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+51%
+36%

Still filing today

100%
72%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 83% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $200k went to new ones.

50%100%’17’18’19’20’21’23’25
RenewedFirst-time

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

’17’18’19’20’21’23’25
Arts & CultureCommunity ImprovementHuman ServicesEducationCrime & LegalPublic BenefitOther
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

  • EL
    EDC LOAN CORPORATION
    4× · 2017–2021 · $3.4M · revenue +8% · 76% of their budget
  • NL
    NEGRO LEAGUES BASEBALL MUSEUM INC
    2× · 2021–2025 · $1.0M · revenue +182%
  • KC
    KANSAS CITY AREA DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL
    2× · 2019–2020 · $17k · revenue +16%

Funded once

  • RM
    RUSSELL MERIT LLC
    one grant, 2023 · $1.0M
  • TL
    The Leroy Satchel Paige Family Home Corp Inc
    one grant, 2023 · $500k
  • FF
    FOUNDATION FOR REGENERATION INC
    one grant, 2023 · $250k
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
Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City Missouri

The mission of the edc is to drive economic development and create an environment in which businesses and residents can prosper and grow in kansas city, missouri.

—
2
The Downtown Council

The mission of the downtown council is to to create and maintain an urban environment that provides (1) economic reasons for businesses to be downtown, (2) a quality of life that encourages people to live downtown, and (3) enterainment and…

—
3
Main Street Corridor Development Corp Dba Midtown Kc Now

Work to suport commercial, mixed use, and residential progress and effective community, economic, and aesthetic development to create and encourage the renewal and vitality of Midtown Kansas City, Missouri.

Community Improvement
4
South Kansas City Chamber of Commerce

To promote area commerce

—
5
Wichita Downtown Development Corporation

The mission of Downtown Wichita is to cultivate opportunities that revitalize and enhance Wichita's urban core.

Community Improvement
6
Kansas City Community Land Trust

Acquire and develop real estate to provide safe, decent, and affordable housing to low-income homeowners while working to ensure a culturally, ethnically, and economically diverse and stable community where generations can thrive in place.

Housing & Shelter
7
Kansas City Regional Destination Develop Ment Foundation

The foundation enhances the quality of life for the kansas city region through tourism advocacy and workforce development.

Community Improvement
8
Dickinson County Economic Development Corporation

To promote economic development in dickinson county by attracting new industries and retaining existing businesses while enhancing and improving the quality of life for businesses, residents and visitors.

Community Improvement
9
Kansas Business Hall of Fame Inc
—
10
Cultivate Kansas City Inc

Grow food, farms and community in support of a sustainable, healthy and local food system.

Food & Nutrition
11
Kansas City Artists Coalition Inc

The kansas city atrtists coalition is a nonprofit organization that promotes visual arts awareness

Arts & Culture
12
St Louis Economic Development Partnership

Economic development.

—
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Downtown Kansas City Civic Ventures; the most unlike its peers is Kansas City Startup Foundation. 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

27 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. 27 of the 54 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.

3
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
27/27
Grantees still filing
19/27
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

EDC LOAN CORPORATION: $3,390,242 · OtherEDC LOAN CORPORATIONRUSSELL MERIT LLC: $1,000,000 · OtherRUSSELL MERIT LLCTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $370,000 · OtherTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY+32 more: $291,000 · Other+32 moreNEGRO LEAGUES BASEBALL MUSEUM INC: $1,010,000 · Arts & CultureNEGRO LEAGUES BASEBA…The Leroy Satchel Paige Family Home Corp Inc: $500,000 · Arts & CultureThe Leroy Satchel Pa…+3 more: $25,000 · Arts & CultureEDC STRATEGIC INITIATIVES FUND: $1,110,000 · Community ImprovementEDC STRATEGIC I…+3 more: $39,250 · Community ImprovementTHE GIVING BACK FUND: $250,000 · PhilanthropyFOUNDATION FOR REGENERATION INC: $250,000 · Housing & ShelterDOWNTOWN KANSAS CITY CIVIC VENTURES: $35,000 · Human ServicesKC DIGITAL DRIVE INC: $12,500 · Human ServicesRECONCILIATION SERVICES: $10,000 · Human ServicesHEART OF AMERICA INDIAN CENTER: $10,000 · Human ServicesKANSAS CITY STARTUP FOUNDATION: $10,500 · EducationGLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP NETWORK: $10,000 · EducationBLACK ARCHIVES OF MID-AMERICA INC: $10,000 · EducationTHE FOUNDATION FOR DELTA EDUCATIONAL & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: $10,000 · Education
Other$5,051,242Arts & Culture$1,535,000Community Improvement$1,149,250Philanthropy$250,000Housing & Shelter$250,000Human Services$67,500Education$40,500

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

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10M$100Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetEDC LOAN CORPORATION: $3,390,242 over 4y, 76% of budgetEDC STRATEGIC INITIATIVES FUND: $1,110,000 over 2y, 94% of budgetNEGRO LEAGUES BASEBALL MUSEUM INC: $1,010,000 over 2y, 10% of budgetTHE NATURE CONSERVANCY: $370,000 over 3y, 0.0% of budgetTHE GIVING BACK FUND: $250,000 over 1y, 0.8% of budgetDOWNTOWN KANSAS CITY CIVIC VENTURES: $35,000 over 1y, 7.2% of budgetProspect Business Association: $20,000 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetKANSAS CITY AREA DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL: $17,250 over 2y, 0.2% of budgetKC DIGITAL DRIVE INC: $12,500 over 2y, 3.5% of budgetTwelfth Street Heritage Development Corporation: $12,000 over 2y, 2.0% of budgetKANSAS CITY STARTUP FOUNDATION: $10,500 over 2y, 1.5% of budgetGLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP NETWORK: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetKANSAS CITY FRIENDS OF ALVIN AILEY: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetRECONCILIATION SERVICES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetHEART OF AMERICA INDIAN CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 1.6% of budgetBLACK ARCHIVES OF MID-AMERICA INC: $10,000 over 1y, 1.8% of budgetTHE FOUNDATION FOR DELTA EDUCATIONAL & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: $10,000 over 1y, 3.7% of budgetCHARLOTTE STREET FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetTHE HELP: $10,000 over 1y, 46% of budgetCHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF GREATER KANSAS CITY: $7,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetBIONEXUS KC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetMUSICAL THEATER HERITAGE INC: $5,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetPOLICE FOUNDATION OF KANSAS CITY: $5,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetPLATTE COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL INC: $5,000 over 1y, 1.5% 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 tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Ewing Marion Kauffman…Greater Kansas City C…Health Forward Founda…United Way of Greater…Arvest FoundationHall Family FoundationHallmark Corporate Fo…The Sunderland Founda…The Bank of America C…American Online Givin…Fidelity Investments …Amazonsmile Foundation
Ewing Marion Kauffman FoundationMO29.9× affinity12 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation · Greater Kansas City Community Foundation · Health Forward Foundation · United Way of Greater Kansas City Inc · Arvest Foundation · Hall Family Foundation · Hallmark Corporate Foundation · The Sunderland Foundation · The Bank of America Charitable Foundation Inc · American Online Giving Foundation 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 Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City Missouri funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City Missouri. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 10%6%25%56%100%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    1get no government money at all
    9report 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
    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 54 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 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Economic Development Corporation of Kansas City Missouri’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