Skip to content

· Public charity

Economic Development Council of Mason County

To expand and diversify the economy throughout mason county by retaining and recruiting jobs, growing strong and sustainable industry clusters, and promoting global competitiveness for washington state.

$256k
Granted FY2023
4
Grants FY2023
1
States reached
$84k
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, FY2021 to 2023.

Human Services$667kPublic Safety & Disaster$256kHealth$204kFood & Nutrition$150kEmployment$119kHousing & Shelter$95kRecreation & Sports$93kArts & Culture$72kOther$0
02FY2023 · 4 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

By grant size · FY2023

  • $10k–50k1 grant · $44k
  • $50k–250k3 grants · $211k
$76,757
Median grant
1
States reached
$277k
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Individual grant recipient$84,088
MASON COUNTY SENIOR ACTIVITIES ASSO$76,757
SMOKING MO'S$50,435
HOOD CANAL SALMON ENHANCEMENT GROUP$44,401
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 (FY23–23, $77k) land where the poverty rate runs at 11%, against an area that typically sits at 7%. 100% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 7%MASON COUNTY SENIOR ACTIVITIES ASSO: $77k → 11%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.

20%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$370k · 11 repeat orgs$1.4M to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +133% since the first grant, against -19% for those funded once.

11 repeat relationships: 2 still active in FY2023, 9 since wound down; 2 grantees were first funded in FY2023 (too recent to call).

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

11
110

Total granted

$370k
$1.3M

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+133%
-19%

Still filing today

9%
5%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2023, 37% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $161k went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23
RenewedFirst-time

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

’21’22’23
HealthHuman ServicesAnimalsOther
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

  • SM
    SMOKING MO'S
    3× · 2021–2023 · $88k
  • HC
    HOOD CANAL SALMON ENHANCEMENT GROUP
    2× · 2022–2023 · $62k · revenue +133%
  • BR
    Blondie's Restaurant
    2× · 2021–2022 · $40k

Funded once

  • MB
    Mike's Beach Resort
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
  • SR
    Sisters Restaurant
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
  • SL
    Spencer Lake Bar & Grill
    one grant, 2021 · $25k
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
Chamber Alliance of Mason County

The mission of the chamber is to promote business, enhance economic and community development, and serve as a catalyst for improving the overall quality of life in mason county.

—
2
Mason Area Chamber of Commerce

To promote economic development

—
3
Mason Senior Citizen Center

To delivery hot meals to those unable to leave their homes. we also assist with rent and utlitilies to families in need.

Human Services
4
Mason City Area Nursing Home Association Inc

Nursing home operations

Health
5
Mason County Community Foundation Nfp
Youth Development
6
Mason County Library Board

The mission of the library is to provide diverse and popular materials and personal service to our public, and to foster children's appreciation for reading and learning.

Recreation & Sports
7
Mason County Historical Society

Historical education

—
8
Mason County Habitat for Humanityinc

Provide affordable housing

Housing & Shelter
9
Mason County Action Group Inc

To provide nutrition, personal care and transportation to low income and elderly individuals in mason county, west virginia.

Community Improvement
10
Senior Citizens Center

To provide activities and meals for senior citizens in the mason city area.

—
11
Mason County Historical Society Inc

The purpose of the Mason County Historical Society is to educate the public about the history of Mason County.

Arts & Culture
12
Madison County Senior Citizens Cent

The purpose of the Madison County Senior Citizens Center Inc. is to encourage, foster, and develop opportunities for the senior citizens of Madison County through education, recreation, and assistance in independent living.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Mason County Senior Activities Association; the most unlike its peers is Shelton Pre-School Association. 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 123 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)
2
Early backer (in before they grew)
7/8
Grantees still filing
4/8
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SMOKING MO'S: $87,935 · OtherSMOKING MO'SIndividual grant recipient: $84,088 · Other+117 more: $1,467,712 · Other+117 moreMASON COUNTY SENIOR ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATION: $76,757 · Human ServicesHOOD CANAL SALMON ENHANCEMENT GROUP: $61,901 · AnimalsHARMONY HILL OF UNION: $18,750 · HealthMASON HEALTH FOUNDATION: $7,500 · Health
Other$1,639,735Human Services$76,757Animals$61,901Health$26,250

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 budgetMASON COUNTY SENIOR ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATION: $76,757 over 1y, 6.0% of budgetHOOD CANAL SALMON ENHANCEMENT GROUP: $61,901 over 2y, 1.1% of budgetHARMONY HILL OF UNION: $18,750 over 1y, 1.2% of budgetSHELTON-MASON COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: $12,110 over 1y, 2.4% of budgetMASON HEALTH FOUNDATION: $7,500 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetSound Learning: $7,500 over 1y, 2.7% of budgetShelton Pre-School Association: $6,330 over 1y, 13% 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 MASON COUNTY SENIOR ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATION ↗
  • Who funds HOOD CANAL SALMON ENHANCEMENT GROUP ↗
  • Who funds HARMONY HILL OF UNION ↗

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.

Ndc Housing & Economic Development Corporation - Group ReturnNY15.4× affinity20 shared granteesties to 2 of 2Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Ndc Housing & Economic Development Corporation - Group Return · The Community Foundation of South Puget Sound · 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 Council of Mason County funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Economic Development Council of Mason County. Bigger dots raise more.

2023
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%1%4%8%15%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
    0get no government money at all
    3report 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 123 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 2023, released 2023. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Possibly out of date. A more recent filing (FY2025) is on record and reports no grant expense, so the figures above are from FY2023, the most recent year this funder made grants.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Economic Development Council of Mason County’s filings →

    More from the funding graph